Genesis 1:5 THE FIRST DAY (KJV)

[Platte]

So the first day was the day the earth began to rotate?

The beginning of creation and the first day started with the heaven and the earth being created. The Earth was rotating as signified by there being an evening and a morning.

 

[Diamond72]

Could you also ask him for me, if a literal 24 hour day is possible without the sun. I seem to be speaking some kind of foreign language. Thanks.

Ask who? The Sun was already shining when the Earth started to take shape from the surrounding dust and gas.

 

[CoreyD]

Ask who? The Sun was already shining when the Earth started to take shape from the surrounding dust and gas.

We both agree that a day cannot exist without the sun, since the earth rotating is not what makes hours, or days, but @Platte says a day is one full rotation of the earth.

Like you, I believe the sun was created on day 1 as well... it being a part of the heavens, but those who read Genesis creations days as literal 24 hour days, as @Platte does, take Genesis 1:14 as God creating the sun on day 4.

So, I was asking you to ask @Platte.
Are you satisfied with the response to your question?

 

[Platte]

We both agree that a day cannot exist without the sun, since the earth rotating is not what makes hours, or days, but @Platte says a day is one full rotation of the earth.

Like you, I believe the sun was created on day 1 as well... it being a part of the heavens, but those who read Genesis creations days as literal 24 hour days, as @Platte does, take Genesis 1:14 as God creating the sun on day 4.

So, I was asking you to ask @Platte.
Are you satisfied with the response to your question?

SMH

 

[Diamond72]

those who read Genesis creations days as literal 24 hour days

Genesis 2:8 Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed.

Whatever moment of time God "put the man" into Eden, there had to have been a week of 7 24 days before that moment in time. Noah saved Eden and for man to be alive he has to have food to eat. All the plants and animals that we read about in our Bible.

It is interesting though that the food they eat in Asia is different from the food in the middle east. I have an Asian wife. She can eat our food but she prefers her food.

 

[David Lamb]

Noah saved Eden and for man to be alive he has to have food to eat. All the plants and animals that we read about in our Bible.

Sorry, but where do you read in the bible that Noah saved Eden?

 

[Diamond72]

Sorry, but where do you read in the bible that Noah saved Eden?

I read that in my biology book and in the science of botany. There are experts in the middle east on how wild plants became the cultivated plants we read about in our Bible. They have a PhD and teach at the Universities in Jerusalam.

Of course MANY people to day believe their pastor with a two year associate degree but reject the scientist that has a PhD and is a expert in their field of study.

Moody Bible Institute in Chicago is known for its conservative evangelical stance, which often includes a belief in Young Earth Creationism (YEC). While not all faculty members may hold this view. So not even do the teachers at the schools that crank out YEC pastors agree on this issue.

Jesus tells us “Can a blind man lead another blind man? No. Both of them will fall into a ditch” (Luke 6:39)

 

[David Lamb]

I read that in my biology book and in the science of botany. There are experts in the middle east on how wild plants became the cultivated plants we read about in our Bible. They have a PhD and teach at the Universities in Jerusalam.

Of course MANY people to day believe their pastor with a two year associate degree but reject the scientist that has a PhD and is a expert in their field of study.

Moody Bible Institute in Chicago is known for its conservative evangelical stance, which often includes a belief in Young Earth Creationism (YEC). While not all faculty members may hold this view. So not even do the teachers at the schools that crank out YEC pastors agree on this issue.

Jesus tells us “Can a blind man lead another blind man? No. Both of them will fall into a ditch” (Luke 6:39)

I'm sorry but I just don't see that a science degree enables somebody to tell us what the bible teaches about Noah. What evidence could there be? Nothing in the bible says that Noah saved Eden. I would rather believe what God says in His Word.

 

[Platte]

I read that in my biology book and in the science of botany. There are experts in the middle east on how wild plants became the cultivated plants we read about in our Bible. They have a PhD and teach at the Universities in Jerusalam.

Of course MANY people to day believe their pastor with a two year associate degree but reject the scientist that has a PhD and is a expert in their field of study.

Moody Bible Institute in Chicago is known for its conservative evangelical stance, which often includes a belief in Young Earth Creationism (YEC). While not all faculty members may hold this view. So not even do the teachers at the schools that crank out YEC pastors agree on this issue.

Jesus tells us “Can a blind man lead another blind man? No. Both of them will fall into a ditch” (Luke 6:39)

I’m surprised (not really) that the moderators would even let you post non sense like that. Silly. I’m assuming you were just joking when you said you read it in your Biology book. lol that was a good one.

 

[Platte]

Of course MANY people to day believe their pastor with a two year associate degree but reject the scientist that has a PhD and is an expert in their field of study.

The belief that heaven or an afterlife awaits us is a "fairy story" for people afraid of death, Stephen Hawking has said.

To Billy Graham, death was not the end, but the wonderful beginning of an eternal life in Heaven.

Stephan Hawkins is one the great scientific minds. Oxford education with PHD among so many other educational accomplishments.

Billy Graham was educated from unaccredited Christian colleges

So which of these two are right about life after death? Am I ok to reject a Scientific God with a superior mind and education accomplishments? Or should I accept his position over the 2 year educational pastors that hold the same belief as Billy Graham?

Tell me which do you believe and why?

 

[Diamond72]

Stephan Hawkins is one the great scientific minds.

His outward appearance was a reflection of how twisted his thinking was. Stephen Hawking lost three notable bets:

1. Cygnus X-1 Bet: In 1975, he bet Kip Thorne that Cygnus X-1 was not a black hole. He conceded this bet in 1990.
2. Black Hole Information Paradox Bet: He bet John Preskill that information falling into a black hole would be lost forever. He conceded this bet in 20042.
3. Higgs Boson Bet: He bet Gordon Kane $100 that the Higgs boson would never be discovered. He lost this bet in 2012 when the Higgs boson was confirmed1.

We have the same situation with Stephen Jay Gould who also died an early death. Like Hawking's, Gould was an atheist. His co author Niles Eldredge was agnostic, he is still alive and still working at the age of 81. We need to use the gifts and abilities God gives us to honor him, not dishonor God the way Hawking's and Gould did. Even though they were both highly acclaimed as being brilliant in their field of study.

Gould's most significant contribution to evolutionary biology was the theory of punctuated equilibrium[2] developed with Niles Eldredge in 1972.[3] The theory proposes that most evolution is characterized by long periods of evolutionary stability, infrequently punctuated by swift periods of branching speciation. The theory was contrasted against phyletic gradualism, the popular idea that evolutionary change is marked by a pattern of smooth and continuous change in the fossil record.[4]

So you ask should you trust a Theist to understand Theism. Or should you trust an anti theist? I personally would trust the theist over the anti theist.

 

[Platte]

His outward appearance was a reflection of how twisted his thinking was. Stephen Hawking lost three notable bets:

1. Cygnus X-1 Bet: In 1975, he bet Kip Thorne that Cygnus X-1 was not a black hole. He conceded this bet in 1990.
2. Black Hole Information Paradox Bet: He bet John Preskill that information falling into a black hole would be lost forever. He conceded this bet in 20042.
3. Higgs Boson Bet: He bet Gordon Kane $100 that the Higgs boson would never be discovered. He lost this bet in 2012 when the Higgs boson was confirmed1.

We have the same situation with Stephen Jay Gould who also died an early death. Like Hawking's, Gould was an atheist. His co author Niles Eldredge was agnostic, he is still alive and still working at the age of 81. We need to use the gifts and abilities God gives us to honor him, not dishonor God the way Hawking's and Gould did. Even though they were both highly acclaimed as being brilliant in their field of study.

Gould's most significant contribution to evolutionary biology was the theory of punctuated equilibrium[2] developed with Niles Eldredge in 1972.[3] The theory proposes that most evolution is characterized by long periods of evolutionary stability, infrequently punctuated by swift periods of branching speciation. The theory was contrasted against phyletic gradualism, the popular idea that evolutionary change is marked by a pattern of smooth and continuous change in the fossil record.[4]

So you ask should you trust a Theist to understand Theism. Or should you trust an anti theist? I personally would trust the theist over the anti theist.

I think you’d find very few scientist that share Billy Grahams view that if you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ then you will be resurrected and given a new body after death and live eternity with God. How many scientist do you think would agree that the reason God created the Earth and the Universe was for God to establish His family with man?

 

[Diamond72]

How many scientist do you think would agree that the reason God created the Earth and the Universe was for God to establish His family with man?

One third, just as the Bible says all tongues, tribes, nations and people. Revelation 7:9.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

From whose perspective should we look at the Genesis account of creation? From what perspective was the author of Genesis observing and writing?

Gen 1:1 seems to me like it is a general overview: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Old and young earth creationists both agree with this statement. We simply disagree about when the "beginning" was. Classic Dispensationalists promote and hold to a "Gap Theory" where there is an indeterminable time between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I am not a dispensationalist and I reject the gap theory but I do find their view of six-days of "re-creation" as intriguing and there are a couple of things I like to "steal" from their view as I believe they are relevant and helpful to our understanding of the passage.

As I say, Gen 1:1 is a broad "God View" of creation speaking of the whole of the cosmos whereas verse two onward focuses its attention upon the creation of the earth making it habitable for mankind. I would therefore say that God created the entire universe (sun, moon, stars, planets, planet earth, etc.) and likely did so instantaneously. I reject the nebular hypothesis developed by Immanuel Kant and promoted by Larkin in his "Dispensational Truth" book (Larkin, 21). IMNSHO, I see no need whatsoever for any naturalistic explanation of the origin of the universe and such would be completely outside of the scope of science anyway. The author of Hebrews reminds us that "through faith, we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God... (Heb 11:3) and God spoke directly to the children of Israel stating directly that he made heaven and earth in six days and rested on the seventh (Ex 20:11. In other words, I believe God created the universe with all of its moving parts and set them in motion. Logic tells us that you cannot create a piston moving up and down in a cylinder without also creating the wrist pins, connecting rods, crankshaft, and the engine block holding everything together!

I would therefore assert that verse 2 onward is written from the perspective of one standing on the face of the earth which had a covering that obstructed any light reaching the surface and when God said "let there be light," this obstruction was removed which revealed the light coming from the sun. The observer could not yet see the sun, moon and stars which were ultimately revealed on the fourth day.

I have said all of this to preface the answer to your question. The mechanism by which a "day" is measured is clearly articulated on "day one" and is used throughout this account of creation! The "First Day" was therefore a 24-hour period with perhaps some variance of minutes or even hours but certainly not years or millennia as some would like to interpret the account of creation according to Peter's statement in his epistle (2 Pet 3:8).

 

[Platte]

From whose perspective should we look at the Genesis account of creation? From what perspective was the author of Genesis observing and writing?

What do you mean by this question? Not sure I've ever seen that question regarding any other verses in the Bible.

I would therefore say that God created the entire universe (sun, moon, stars, planets, planet earth, etc.) and likely did so instantaneously.

You reject that the Bible says those things were made on day 4? You do not accept verse 4 for example that says God made the stars on day 4?

I have said all of this to preface the answer to your question. The mechanism by which a "day" is measured is clearly articulated on "day one" and is used throughout this account of creation! The "First Day" was therefore a 24-hour period with perhaps some variance of minutes or even hours but certainly not years or millennia as some would like to interpret the account of creation according to Peter's statement in his epistle (2 Pet 3:8).

I agree.

 

[BNR32FAN]

This is true, David. The Bible does not tell us, but I believe we can reason on it, and reach a fairly accurate conclusion.

We can for example ask:
Was the one language that was spoken changed, and discarded? Why would that be necessary?
If the one language remained, and was carried on by some, then it was still being used later.
We know Abraham, was called a Hebrew. Genesis 14:13 Which means Abraham's ancestors were Hebrew.

This would mean that God would have preserved the language in the line of
Abram
Terah
Nahor
Serug
Reu
Peleg
Eber
Shelah
Arpachshad
Shem
Genesis 11:10-27
Noah
Lamech
Methuselah
Enoch
Jared
Mahalalel
Kenan
Enosh
Seth
Adam
Genesis 5:1-31

However, this is just a theory, and I have no way of verifying it, but it seems reasonable to me.
I would not state dogmatically that it is correct. We do not know.

I see one potential problem with this theory based on Genesis 11. In Genesis 11 it says that the whole world spoke one language but then God confused the entire world’s language and scattered them abroad. So if He confused the language of the entire world then the language that was spoken by the whole world before that confusion was lost. According to the information in Genesis 11 no one could possibly know what language was spoken before this chapter.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Walk with me.
You say God created the heavens and the earth in one day of 24 hours, correct?
You say a day of 24 hours is when the earth makes one full rotation, correct?

There is no earth rotating, correct?
So, start the day.
If God creates the heavens and the earth at a snap of the finger - viola - heaven and earth appear.... then the earth can begin rotating, correct?
This means that before the earth even makes an oomph of a rotation, the heavens and earth are created, correct?

What did I get wrong? Please correct the error.
If all I said is correct, the heavens and the earth were not created in 24 hours, but less than a second... even before the earth could make a rotation.

If you say the rotation was really really fast, in a split second, that is not 24 hours.
If you say the day began after the earth was created, then the earth was not created in a day. Nor a literal 24 hour one.

Anything that happens in less than 24 hours can be said that it happened in a day. It doesn’t have to take exactly 24 hours in order to accurately say that it took place in a day. If you ask anyone how long something might take and they say we can get it done in a day that doesn’t mean that it’s going to take them exactly 24 hours. It just means that it will be completed within 24 hours.

 

[CoreyD]

I see one potential problem with this theory based on Genesis 11. In Genesis 11 it says that the whole world spoke one language but then God confused the entire world’s language and scattered them abroad. So if He confused the language of the entire world then the language that was spoken by the whole world before that confusion was lost. According to the information in Genesis 11 no one could possibly know what language was spoken before this chapter.

Shem and other faithful ones would ot have been with Nimrod and the rebels.
So, God would not have confused the language they spoke.
Also, God could preserve the original language. It's not a given that he has to discard it.
So, I would not consider that a problem.

What I would consider a problem to my theory is the scripture you used.
It says all the earth was one language, so that would poke a big hole in the idea that only one line of descendants spoke Hebrew.
You busted my theory.

Anything that happens in less than 24 hours can be said that it happened in a day.

It depends on whose perspective you are looking at, you see.
For example, a day's work for some is 5 hours... 8 hours... etc.
So from the perspective of the manager of a company, a day can be any amount of hours within 24 hours.

From the perspective of God, a day is not restricted to 24 hours.
This is the crux of the matter. Whose perspective are we looking at?

To @Platte a day is one full rotation of the earth. Never mind that is not true.

Day is defined, as,

1. The period of light between dawn and nightfall; the interval from sunrise to sunset.
2. The 24-hour period during which the earth completes one rotation on its axis, traditionally measured from midnight to midnight.
3. The period during which a celestial body makes a similar rotation.
4. One of the numbered 24-hour periods into which a week, month, or year is divided.
5. The portion of a 24-hour period that is devoted to work, school, or business.
   "an eight-hour day; a sale that lasted for three days."
6. A 24-hour period or a portion of it that is reserved for a certain activity.
   "a day of rest."
7. A specific, characteristic period in one's lifetime.

Without light from the sun, talking about day, is meaningless.
A day is the time period of a full rotation of the Earth with respect to the Sun. On average, this is 24 hours (86,400 seconds).

It doesn’t have to take exactly 24 hours in order to accurately say that it took place in a day. If you ask anyone how long something might take and they say we can get it done in a day that doesn’t mean that it’s going to take them exactly 24 hours.

If someone says they can get something done in a day, and they mean less than 24 hours, they are not communicating well, imo.
If they said they can get it done before/by the end of the day, or a few hours, etc., they are using proper and correct terms. They are being accurate.

In fact, the former is using day figuratively, and not literally, as in the latter.
However, it boils down to the perspective.

It just means that it will be completed within 24 hours.

Noah's day was within a period of 1000 years - exactly 950 years.
What point did you want to make with this?

Now that you are here, according to Genesis 2:4, are all six days included in, or counted as a day?

 

[Armchair Apologist]

What do you mean by this question? Not sure I've ever seen that question regarding any other verses in the Bible.

I am simply asking about the writer's point of view. Is he writing as one standing next to God during his work of creation or is from the perspective of one who is on the earth and therefore seeing God's work of creation from an "earthly" perspective? Therefore, what exactly is God revealing to the author (Moses, IMO)?

You reject that the Bible says those things were made on day 4? You do not accept verse 4 for example that says God made the stars on day 4?

Not at all! What I am suggesting is that on Day 4, the sun, moon, and stars appeared and were made visible to someone standing on the earth. It says that God "made" them (which he did) but were they "made" on the fourth day or did they simply appear to the author as being made.

This is just speculation to me and is something I have borrowed from the "gap theorist" view. It is certainly not something where I would take a dogmatic stand! Perhaps someone here is knowledgeable in Hebrew and could therefore parse this passage to give us a little more "light?"

To say that the "Light" on day one comes from anything other than our sun does not make sense to me. I have heard such referred to as God's revelation of himself to his creation but the scriptures clearly tell us that "God is light and in him is no darkness at all" (1 Jn 1:5). There is no time when darkness "is" and and God "is not" so I am convinced that this would not be the correct application. It seems clear that this light and darkness is a measure of time of which the rest of the passage aligns with and follows.

I agree.

Good! You may not agree with my thinking (and I apologize for any confusion) but at least we agree with the conclusion: that the days of creation were seven "solar days" each being approximately 24-hours!

 

[BNR32FAN]

Shem and other faithful ones would ot have been with Nimrod and the rebels.
So, God would not have confused the language they spoke.
Also, God could preserve the original language. It's not a given that he has to discard it.
So, I would not consider that a problem.

What I would consider a problem to my theory is the scripture you used.
It says all the earth was one language, so that would poke a big hole in the idea that only one line of descendants spoke Hebrew.
You busted my theory.


It depends on whose perspective you are looking at, you see.
For example, a day's work for some is 5 hours... 8 hours... etc.
So from the perspective of the manager of a company, a day can be any amount of hours within 24 hours.

From the perspective of God, a day is not restricted to 24 hours.
This is the crux of the matter. Whose perspective are we looking at?

To @Platte a day is one full rotation of the earth. Never mind that is not true.

Day is defined, as,

1. The period of light between dawn and nightfall; the interval from sunrise to sunset.
2. The 24-hour period during which the earth completes one rotation on its axis, traditionally measured from midnight to midnight.
3. The period during which a celestial body makes a similar rotation.
4. One of the numbered 24-hour periods into which a week, month, or year is divided.
5. The portion of a 24-hour period that is devoted to work, school, or business.
   "an eight-hour day; a sale that lasted for three days."
6. A 24-hour period or a portion of it that is reserved for a certain activity.
   "a day of rest."
7. A specific, characteristic period in one's lifetime.

Without light from the sun, talking about day, is meaningless.
A day is the time period of a full rotation of the Earth with respect to the Sun. On average, this is 24 hours (86,400 seconds).


If someone says they can get something done in a day, and they mean less than 24 hours, they are not communicating well, imo.
If they said they can get it done before/by the end of the day, or a few hours, etc., they are using proper and correct terms. They are being accurate.

In fact, the former is using day figuratively, and not literally, as in the latter.
However, it boils down to the perspective.


Noah's day was within a period of 1000 years - exactly 950 years.
What point did you want to make with this?

Now that you are here, according to Genesis 2:4, are all six days included in, or counted as a day?

“Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭11‬:‭9‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

The term “in the day” (Beyovm) refers to a period of time. Have you ever heard the term “back in my day”? It’s the same usage.