Explain Genesis 1 literally to me

[Keachian]

That sounds pretty close except there was no Temple, the Tabernacle would not even be prepared until the time of the Exodus. I don't know what ANE perspective you are working from here but God was with Adam on a daily basis in the original creation.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

Creation is the Temple, that's what the whole point of the text is; cosmogony, within ANE thought cosmogony is tied to the place in which the God controls the universe in this case creation

 

[cupid dave]

I'm wondering if anyone who take Genesis chapter 1 literally can explain it to me, verse by verse. I'm particularly interested in how the waters above the stars got there. Were the waters on earth first and then zipped out into the far reaches of the universe?

In addition to literally understanding it, I'd like to know the reason He did it that way. Why did God make a bunch of water and then seperate it? Why not just make it seperate in the first place? Why make light and then the sun, why not just make it all at once?

Thanks for your patience with me as I learn about this

Genesis reads literally in the same way modern science explains the unfolding of the Heavens and Earth beginning with the Big Bang theory.


If you have the time and inclination I will demonstrate vers by verse that science and Genesis correspond one-to-one with each other.

I will bracket my scientific explanations,Bible word definitions, and sources so you can get it.





Lets try the Big Bang Beginning:


[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif](Click on picture to go to next page)[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Gen. 1:1 In the beginning, (the Formative/Cosmology Era), God, (the Uncaused First Cause, or the Dark Energy which pre-existed the material Universe, perhaps), created... (all that which has followed the Big Bang from the singularity of Planck Time which consisted of Seven Stages:
1) The Inflation Era
2) The Quark Era
3) Hadron Era
4) Lepton Era
5) Nucleosynthesis Era
6) Opaque Era
7) Matter Era,... in an enormous Einsteinian energy transformation, E = mC^2), the (matter composing the) heaven (beyond the Solar System) and the (accretion disk which congealed into the planet) earth.
[/FONT]

http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id19.html

 

[cupid dave]

Dieselman, thanks for responding. I'll wait until you go over the rest of the chapter so that I can get the big picture before asking questions.

Well that would be better answered by sending you to review the site I am using then.

But here is Gen 1:2 if you insist on this method of discovery:




[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif](Picture is link to Gen 1:3)[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Gen. 1:2 And the earth was without form, (a spinning cloud of molten matter and gases), and void: (not valid as a sphere yet- an accretion disk), and darkness: [choshek: obscurity] was upon the face of the deep: [tehowm: the deep primeval abyss]. And (the great Shechinah), the spirit, (the pan-en-theistic Natural Laws) of God moved upon the face: [paniym: presence] of the waters (of these transitory things: [mayim: Hebrew])





[/FONT]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Rom. 1:20 [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]For, from the creation of the (material Universe which we know as the) world, the invisible things of him, (in panentheistic expression, as the spirit of God behind all natural phenomenon), are clearly seen, (empirically, by the rational application of the methods of our science), being understood (pan-en-theistically, God, seen in his Natural Laws: similar to the way he is seen in Torah, ie Law), by (a progression of theories concerning) the things that are made, (and by our on-going observation of the natural laws appropriate to them), even his(pre-Big Bang presence as the Uncaused First Cause of all) eternal, (transcendent) power and Godhead (in Trinity: Theistic God, Panentheistic God, and Immanent (mantally) God); so that (even the atheists), they are without excuse:


[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[juvenissun]

I'm wondering if anyone who take Genesis chapter 1 literally can explain it to me, verse by verse. I'm particularly interested in how the waters above the stars got there. Were the waters on earth first and then zipped out into the far reaches of the universe?

In addition to literally understanding it, I'd like to know the reason He did it that way. Why did God make a bunch of water and then seperate it? Why not just make it seperate in the first place? Why make light and then the sun, why not just make it all at once?

Thanks for your patience with me as I learn about this

We live on the earth. Everything in the sky is "above" us. Correct?

So, Mars (have or had water) is above us. Europa (Jupiter's moon supposed to have ocean on it) is also above us. Correct?

In a starry night, you look at one "star" in the sky [such as the Venus, or the Naptune], and say: I guess there is water up there. Is it a wrong description?

If so, is there still any problem with the literal description of "water above"? It implies: pools of liquid water is formed on planets, on ALL planets in this universe.

 

[juvenissun]

Hi Mark,

Your post is long and it's good to read through. I find that if I try to respond to 14 different points at once things become difficult to keep track of. I'm not ignoring or brushing your post off I just want to start off by focusing on a single question to get the discussion moving.

So in verse 16 and 17 when it says that God made the two great lights and the stars, and that He placed them in the firmament, you don't think that it's a literal account of what happened?

A question for you to think about:

Sun, moon and earth, which one was made first?

Science speculated: Sun first, earth and moon came later. [has big big problems]
Genesis 1 says: earth was made first, sun and moon were made later. [It does not say other planets were made in a similar sequence]

The current science can not say what the Genesis says is wrong.

 

[mark kennedy]

Thanks for your patience with me as I learn about this

I'm really just curious, promise I'll just hear you out this time. Are you making any progress in understanding the Genesis account of creation from a literal point of reference?

Any thoughts or insights you would care to share? Maybe you would like to try an exposition of your own? Nothing fancy, what do you think the message of Genesis 1 is from the text as you understand it?

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Johnnz]

I'm really just curious, promise I'll just hear you out this time. Are you making any progress in understanding the Genesis account of creation from a literal point of reference?

Literal here must mean "How the original author and readers understood the text". Neither lived with the concepts we have in a modern society. The idea of "How?" or even "When?" did not concern them as it does us. Their focus was on "Why?" They lived wanting to please their gods, so the why was important.

Moses (the commonly accepted author of Genesis and the Israelites ahd recently left Egypt after 4 centuries. They were imbued with Egyptian beliefs and culture. Moses took that Egyptian creation stories and recast them in terms of the God Moses knew. Essentially, Genesis sets out a story of God building His temple, the earth, assigning boundaries and functions to it, and finally setting up his 'idols', people as His image bearers, to be his co-regents and priests.

Thus, Genesis is not an account of a creation time line (When and How) but the establishing of the earth under the stewardship of humanity for yet more wonderful purposes. This is why Paul writes about the renewal of creation as we see in his letters. The entire debate and attempts to reconcile creation and science is a huge waste of effort. Both have different agendas, and rightfully so. It's when we confuse agendas that we end up with the confusion we have in the various positions adopted by Christians. We of course Christians reject the 'no proof of God therefore there isn't one' position that some people trespassing from science into metaphysics and philosophy propound. Let us enjoy scientific discoveries of the wonders of creation and live as people with an understanding of some of the important "Whys' and 'What fors' that the genesis account gives to us.

John
NZ

 

[miamited]

hi philis,

The first sentence says that God created everything in this realm. Both the seen and the unseen. The second sentence says that the planet was covered completely with water and because it was all water and no dry ground the surface of the earth was formless. Because of what God did on the second day we also can understand that not only was their water sloshing about on the planet like the seas today, but that there was also a mist of water settled above the water. The second sentence also tells us that God's Spirit was all about the earth. In the fourth sentence we are told that God commanded light to appear and that where that light shone God called day and where it remained dark God called night. The next sentence tells us that this was all that God completed in building our home in the time of the earth's first rotation upon its axis.

As the earth continued to spin God then divided the water that was sloshing around on the face of the earth, from the mist of water above the watery sea. He took the water of the mist and raised it above the surface of the earth to allow an atmosphere between the watery surface of the earth and the mist of water. That expanse between the water and the mist, God called sky. The was all the work that God did in creating the new home for mankind when the earth made its second full rotation.

As the earth continued to spin God drew the water on the face of the earth to one place and allowed dry ground to appear. This would have been what we call today a 'continent'. God called the 'continent' land and the remaining area of water, seas. Then God covered the dry ground with plants of all kinds that had seed in them to produce the second and successive generations of plants just like themselves. This completed all of God's work as the earth completed its third full rotation upon its axis.

Then God created all of the heavenly bodies that we see when we look up into the night sky. The Sun, moon and stars. Asteroids and planets. He literally swept His hand across the vastness of the universe and filled all of the black inky void of the universe with stars and various other heavenly bodies. And God explained that these additional heavenly bodies would be for governing the day and night and for signs and season to mankind, who would soon be upon the earth. This completed all of the work that God did by the time the earth completed its fourth full rotation upon its axis.

Then as the earth continued to spin upon its axis God filled the seas with all the hundreds and hundreds of various fish and sea species and hundreds and hundreds of various species of birds. He made them all with reproductive systems that would reproduce their own kind. As God finished this the earth completed its fifth full rotation upon its axis.

Then as the earth continued to spin upon its axis God made all sorts of creatures that would live upon the land, culminating in a man who He called Adam and the earth completed its sixth rotation. Everything that God had made was very good and God rested as the earth completed its seventh rotation.

That, as I understand it, is how God created both the heavens and the earth.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Calminian]

I'm wondering if anyone who take Genesis chapter 1 literally can explain it to me, verse by verse. I'm particularly interested in how the waters above the stars got there. Were the waters on earth first and then zipped out into the far reaches of the universe?

In addition to literally understanding it, I'd like to know the reason He did it that way. Why did God make a bunch of water and then seperate it? Why not just make it seperate in the first place? Why make light and then the sun, why not just make it all at once?

Thanks for your patience with me as I learn about this

I was so interested in this subject, I decided to write an article on it.
Reconsidering The Waters of Genesis

It's a bit non-traditional, and even includes at theory as to why God did this. Let me know what you think, if you have a chance to delve into it.

 

[mark kennedy]

Literal here must mean "How the original author and readers understood the text". Neither lived with the concepts we have in a modern society. The idea of "How?" or even "When?" did not concern them as it does us. Their focus was on "Why?" They lived wanting to please their gods, so the why was important.

So are your saying, this part of the narrative never happened?

And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice. And the Lord came down upon mount Sinai, on the top of the mount: and the Lord called Moses up to the top of the mount; and Moses went up. (Exodus 19:18-20)​

Moses (the commonly accepted author of Genesis and the Israelites ahd recently left Egypt after 4 centuries. They were imbued with Egyptian beliefs and culture. Moses took that Egyptian creation stories and recast them in terms of the God Moses knew. Essentially, Genesis sets out a story of God building His temple, the earth, assigning boundaries and functions to it, and finally setting up his 'idols', people as His image bearers, to be his co-regents and priests.

So are you saying this never happened?

Then Aaron lifted his hand toward the people, blessed them, and came down from offering the sin offering, the burnt offering, and peace offerings. And Moses and Aaron went into the tabernacle of meeting, and came out and blessed the people. Then the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people, and fire came out from before the Lord and consumed the burnt offering and the fat on the altar. When all the people saw it, they shouted and fell on their faces. (Leveticus 9:22-24)​

Thus, Genesis is not an account of a creation time line (When and How) but the establishing of the earth under the stewardship of humanity for yet more wonderful purposes. This is why Paul writes about the renewal of creation as we see in his letters. The entire debate and attempts to reconcile creation and science is a huge waste of effort. Both have different agendas, and rightfully so. It's when we confuse agendas that we end up with the confusion we have in the various positions adopted by Christians. We of course Christians reject the 'no proof of God therefore there isn't one' position that some people trespassing from science into metaphysics and philosophy propound. Let us enjoy scientific discoveries of the wonders of creation and live as people with an understanding of some of the important "Whys' and 'What fors' that the genesis account gives to us.

So are you saying this will never be literally fulfilled:

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. (Revelations 21:1-3)​

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Johnnz]

The waters and the sea often represented chaos and destruction for the ancients. That was the abode of leviathan and other sea monsters. The genesis story tells of God, the Creator, sovereign of the waters, creating limits for it and bringing forth an environment suitable for life.

John
NZ

 

[mark kennedy]

The waters and the sea often represented chaos and destruction for the ancients. That was the abode of leviathan and other sea monsters. The genesis story tells of God, the Creator, sovereign of the waters, creating limits for it and bringing forth an environment suitable for life.

John
NZ

So are you saying that God never really separated the land from the seas, the clouds from the seas and filled the earth, sea and sky with life in all it's vast array?

 

[Johnnz]

So are you saying that God never really separated the land from the seas, the clouds from the seas and filled the earth, sea and sky with life in all it's vast array?

Three days of creation, three days of filling is the basic structure. For more detail read John Walton "The Lost World of Genesis 1", or find materials on Genesis by Rikk Watts and you will get a fuller explanation of this line of thinking. There is to much background detail involved for an adequate response here.

John
NZ

 

[samaus12345]

Atheists know what genesis says and claims (literal 6 day creation). This is why they are very effective preachers. Take out the foundation of the building and the rest follows naturally. Dawkins,Harris,Hitchens (in hell though now), where do they aim there attacks? The gospels? No (even though thats the ultimate goal, but easier to start where they can easssillyyy move people off their faith), revelation? No. Boom "In the beginning....". They have done well for themselves

 

[Johnnz]

So then we don't buy into their debate by not accepting their wrong beliefs about what Genesis is actually saying to us. We can suggest they are using science to debunk a literary genre whereas each has its own realm of authority. Where meaning and purpose is the goal the 'how' and 'when' issues of science are not really relevant.

John
NZ

 

[mark kennedy]

Three days of creation, three days of filling is the basic structure. For more detail read John Walton "The Lost World of Genesis 1", or find materials on Genesis by Rikk Watts and you will get a fuller explanation of this line of thinking. There is to much background detail involved for an adequate response here.

John
NZ

So your not going to answer straight forward questions as to whether or not you believe God spoke to Moses from Sinai. You won't say if you believe 'fire came out from before the Lord' at the dedication of the Tabernacle. or whether or not Revelations 21 is a promise of a new creation at the end of the age. Got a newsflash for you Johnnz, those are the background questions.

But you want me to go out and by a book buy an Cambridge PHD, with a background in secular science and a determined belief that Genesis 1 is a reiteration of Egyptian mythology. I like Mediterranean mythology to but I don't believe the Scriptures to be derived from pagan myths.

Thanks, but I'll pass.

So then we don't buy into their debate by not accepting their wrong beliefs about what Genesis is actually saying to us. We can suggest they are using science to debunk a literary genre whereas each has its own realm of authority. Where meaning and purpose is the goal the 'how' and 'when' issues of science are not really relevant.

Wrong beliefs? Debunk a literary genre? Realm of authority? Meaning and purpose?

Now if you could relate that to something tangible it might prove to be a meaningful statement but it sounds like you are talking in circles.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[samaus12345]

- The True.Origin Archive -

These guys set this up to destroy that talkorigins website

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]1. [/FONT]The myth that the Neo-Darwinian macro-evolution belief system—as heavily popularized by today’s self-appointed “science experts,” the popular media, academia, and certain government agencies—finds “overwhelming” or even merely unequivocal support in the data of empirical science.

 

[1234321]

I'm wondering if anyone who take Genesis chapter 1 literally can explain it to me, verse by verse. I'm particularly interested in how the waters above the stars got there. Were the waters on earth first and then zipped out into the far reaches of the universe?

In addition to literally understanding it, I'd like to know the reason He did it that way. Why did God make a bunch of water and then seperate it? Why not just make it seperate in the first place? Why make light and then the sun, why not just make it all at once?

Thanks for your patience with me as I learn about this

Hi, I will give it a go for you, if you haven't already gotten enough information (this is somewhat of a blind post.) I will be using Hebrew definitions when I give the explanations, and Greek when necessary. If you don't speak Hebrew or Greek, or want to follow along, you can use a Strong's concordance, or download E-sword. I will also break it up in parts. I believe the first chapter of Genesis is a literal account of the creation of the universe and living creatures, even if the authors of the bible reasoned in their own mind that it was an allegory. God works in mysterious ways, especially in terms of inspiration. So, lets begin with Genesis 1:1-2, and if you want me to continue just nod or something. There is so much information in each word of these verses.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

• In the beginning in Hebrew is "reshiyth" which means "the first[fruit], beginning, chief, first in place, order, rank or time, principle thing."
• God created the heaven and the earth in Hebrew is "Elohiym bara shamayim erets."
  • Elohiym is a plural form of "god," often used as the title "[Supreme/Most High] God," and is sometimes used to reference angels.
  • Two things are important to note at this point
    • We are in the beginning (so there was nothing before Elohiym created the heaven and the earth.) There were no angels in the beginning before God created the Heaven and Earth, but after...
    • We know from John 1:1-3 that "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made." Therefore, we can deduce that the grammatical syntax of using Elohiym instead of Elohim (singular) is referring to God the Father and Christ the Son of God existing in the beginning of creation, creating.
  • Bara means to cut down, cut, feed, choose, dispatch.
  • Shamayim is loftiness, referring the the visible arc of loftiness in the sky, and the loftiness of the space in which celestial bodies reside. By implication, since the heaven and then earth (erets) are created, we can reason that heaven in this context is the cosmos.
• Summary: From the Hebrew we have something like "At the beginning/First in place, God the Father and the Word of God created the cosmos and the firm ground and land."

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

• When And is used in the bible, it usually means that an accented period of time has passed between the preceding event, and the proceeding event. Examples on either side is the birth of Cain and Abel. They were twins, and it is accented by denoting that the time between their birth should be recognized as being close together by saying "and she bare again..." On the other side, Genesis 6:1 begins "and it came to pass..." to denote that after the lineages of Cain and Adam had established themselves, and multiplied, a new event (Nephilim) occurred. The length of time here is implied as being a long period of at least a generation.
• And the earth was without form is "Erets hayah tohu."
  • And the earth is, once again "erets"
  • Hayah is Hebrew for to exist in any tense i.e. it means to be, become, or come to pass (present, past, future.)
    • HAYAH ASHER HAYAH is the Hebrew name God described Himself as in Exodus 3:14, and it means "I AM THAT I AM," or "I EXIST BECAUSE I EXIST"
  • Tohu is Hebrew for "lying waste, desolate, figuratively a worthless thing, desert, vain, confusion..."
    • God does not create waste, desolation, worthlessness, vanity and confusion. That happens as the result of rebellion and iniquity...interesting.
    • By this implication that God does not initially create a desolate wasteland, we can deduce the word Hayah is more accurately translated became, not was, implying an active transition.
• "Void" in Hebrew is bohu (notice the linguistic similarity between a void, and without form.)
  • Bohu means a vacuity, or an undistinguished ruin.
    • Again, God does not create vacuity and ruins. The earth became this way.

• And darkness upon the face of the deep is translated in Hebrew as "choshek al'paniym t'hom."
  • Notice how there is darkness before a sun and moon is created. Why? How? Where is the light source.
    • Recall, also, that a day begins when light wanes to darkness, and ends when darkness wanes to light. As we see in v.3-5 of the chapter, the earth becoming void, without form and dark is the beginning of the first celestial/Godly day.
    • Chochek means literal darkness, but since there is necessarily no light source (besides the light of God which does not go out, and the light of His faithful children which also does not go out,) we can see figuratively chochek means "misery, destruction, death, sorrow, wickedness, ignorance.
  • Al'paniym t'hom means upon/touching/through/above/over the faces (plural, surfaces) surging mass of water, or abyss.
    • God rose the dry land in the third day, so this implies that Earth was somewhat of a water-world, and the darkness penetrated down to the very bottom of the water world.
    • It is tempting to say that the earth was dark because it was a water world (blocking most light.) However, we have already shown that the earth actively became darkness, and void and without form. This implies that (since God has not began working on the earth yet) something caused this change. Moreover, there is no light spoken of (besides the Light of God) that would turn off to create darkness.

• And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters is "rucah Elohiym racaph al'paniym mayim" in Hebrew.
  • Rucah means wind, breath, exhalation, and can figuratively mean life.
  • Racaph means to brood, but can imply being relaxed, to flutter or shake.
    • To brood means to show deep unhappiness of thought. If His creation turned a perfect planet/cosmos into desolation, destruction, misery, death, and ignorance, it makes sense that God the Father, and Christ the Word would brood over these events. If the planet is just dark, this wouldn't make sense, because if we take that the earth existed as a desolate, dark and shapeless place before God worked on it, He shouldn't feel bad because He made it that way from the beginning.
  • Mayim is the plural word for water, but figuratively can mean juices with unsavory implications (which may prove to be interesting.)
    • An interesting note is that if Earth was a living waterworld, it is similar to a female pregnant with a child living in her bag of waters.

• Summary: The second verse can be read something like this: "And the earth became a wasteland, desolate, and vacuous; and misery, destruction, death, and ignorance touched [even] the abyss [of the earth]. And the breath/exhalation of God the Father, and the Word of God showed deep unhappiness in thought upon the surfaces of the water"

Already in these two verses, we see that something much like the fall of man in the Garden may have occurred, most likely on a spiritual level. Ironically, when man fell, time (in terms of life and death) began for every living creature on earth. In the next section (if you want it) we can see how light and darkness are words for "righteousness and destruction," or Children of God, and children of rebellion. Light and darkness were separated and molded before stars, sun and moon were created.

 

[samaus12345]

Are you an atheist 1234321?

 

[1234321]

Are you an atheist 1234321?

Why would you ask that?

No.