Genesis "and it was good" problem:

[AV1611VET]

If you want to know where I learned this from? It was taught in church by my pastor/scholar.

Did your pastor/scholar tell you Moses crossed the Sea of Reeds, rather than the Red Sea?

Billy Graham once asked him to become his private mentor, but was turned down because of the high demand from the church members.

Don't get me started on Billy Graham.

 

[GenemZ]

Did your pastor/scholar tell you Moses crossed the Sea of Reeds, rather than the Red Sea?

Don't get me started on Billy Graham.

Why?

 

[GenemZ]

Did your pastor/scholar tell you Moses crossed the Sea of Reeds, rather than the Red Sea?

Don't get me started on Billy Graham.

Who is a good evangelist in your estimation?

 

[AV1611VET]

Who is a good evangelist in your estimation?

Charles Haddon Spurgeon is, by far, at the very top of my list.

But I don't think he was an evangelist.

Missionaries that come to mind are: Praying Hyde, Adoniram Judson, Hudson Taylor, David Brainard, John Birch, and several others.

But as for evangelists: Dwight Moody is high on the list, George Whitefield, Billy Sunday, Bob Jones, sr, et alii.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why?

My brother-in-law and sister-in-law worked for him, and they said he would preach a great message of salvation, but during the altar call, when people would come forward for salvation, he would have them dealt with according to their respective religion.

In other words, he had Catholics deal with Catholics, Lutherans with Lutherans, Methodists with Methodists, Baptists with Baptists, and so on.

 

[Lukamu]

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Are there any other translations for the Hebrew word for "evil" in this passage?

 

[Lulav]

"A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers. The name of the first is the Pishon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is the Gihon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Cush. And the name of the third river is the Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates."
- Genesis 2:10-14

There is no way these rivers meet at one point. Historical descriptions of these rivers identify the Gihon as the Nile, since Cush biblically refers to Ethiopia (see Josephus too). There is no way the Nile and the Euphrates branch from the same "river," when they flow down in opposite directions. The word used for "Nile" in other places is 'yeor' which literally means a "canal or stream flowing out" of the Nile in Egypt, and not the whole river itself. The origin location is obviously a mythical place that unites all the geographical regions known to Israel. This alone is a dead give away that it is not a real story, but a folk story that has a meaning within the cultural context designated for the Hebrews.

Not necessarily true. This description was from the perspective of the Garden of God. At that point the land outside the garden was different than afterwards.

Have you ever considered that the landscape changed after the flood? Or don't you believe in that also?

It also changed with the annihilation of Sodom and Gehmorrah. That was the land that Lot chose when splitting up from Abraham. It was a lush and fertaile land and afterwards a wasteland. That area today still shows sulfur balls from that time.

But the bible says that one day it will return to the lush land it was. Also that it was like the Garden of Eden.
Then there's the prophecy (Ezekiel 47:8-9) that speaks of the 'Dead Sea' teaming with life again.

IIRC, some theologians have also argued that, in a sense, "Let Us make man in Our image" has Jesus Christ in mind.

He is called the Second Adam, that maybe why.

That's a helpful clarification. I don't think free will gets God off the hook. At the very least, God created creatures who could turn from the good and chose evil. Either that's a design flaw, which is not acceptable since those creatures are created good and we can safely assume God doesn't make mistakes,, or God knew creatures would chose evil. If the latter, then the Creator bears some responsibility, if not for evil choices, then for redeeming the creation in light of God creating creatures who God knew would choose wrongly.

God is wholly righteous. We don't know the whole story, as he intended. There's no 'design flaw' but it is background to show how we are sheep and we need a Shepherd. When we wander off following our own ways and will trouble comes. But he has graciously allowed us to experience that to show how we do need him without force or inability to choose.

I think it's also important to ask why creatures in a paradisical setting would choose evil, which is essentially choosing against their own good. The fact, according the the Genesis account, that they were able to be deceived is telling. This is why I reject Augustine's reading that basically says they were in a state of near perfection and then fell. Irenaeus's intuition that they were created spiritually immature and reached for the fruit too soon makes more sense. So, again, God knew this was the case and bears responsibility for God's own creation, which the scriptures support. If evil were solely a human problem and responsibility, grace would be unnecessary. But as Paul recognized, God has subjected all to disobedience so that God may be merciful to all.

They did not realize they were choosing evil until afterwards, that is why they hid. Today we can see evil working among us, but they never had that experience. The adversary wanted to be like God, that is why he fell, so he then decided to entice Gods new creation (Adam) to join him in that, that is why he told Eve that she could be like gods and that's why God didn't want them to eat from that tree.

The evil that God created was necessary evil, as opposed to pure evil.

Please explain how you see a difference and give examples. Thanks..

 

[All Becomes New]

Genesis 1:4 in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English:

וירא אלהים את־האור כי־טוב ויבדל אלהים בין האור ובין החשׁך׃ Gen. 1:4

Gen. 1:4 καὶ εἶδεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ φῶς ὅτι καλόν. καὶ διεχώρισεν ὁ θεὸς ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ φωτὸς καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σκότους.

Gen. 1:4 et vidit Deus lucem quod esset bona et divisit lucem ac tenebras

Gen. 1:4. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.. (NRSVUE)

In the Septuagint, the Hebrew word טוֹב (good) is translated as “καλόν” (the neuter singular form of the adjective καλós used in the nominative case). In the Latin Vulgate, the Hebrew word טוֹב (good) is translated as “bona.”)

The standard Greek-English lexicon used today in Bible colleges, seminaries and universities is the Third Edition (2000) of A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, commonly cited by scholars today as the BDAG. It tells us that the Greek word καλós expresses the concept that is expressed in English using the word good “good.”

The identical Hebrew word is used in Genesis 2:18 with the same meaning.

Not sure how that changes anything I said since those are not the verses I am talking about.

 

[Lulav]

Are there any other translations for the Hebrew word for "evil" in this passage?

The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. ~Gen 2:9

The word translated there in Genesis 'evil' is the same word used in the Isaiah passage.

'ra' is the Hebrew for 'evil' Resh Ayin רָ֑ע

The translators like to make it sound different like using words like 'wicked', 'distressed', 'calamity', etc

 

[Jonaitis]

Not necessarily true. This description was from the perspective of the Garden of God. At that point the land outside the garden was different than afterwards.

Have you ever considered that the landscape changed after the flood? Or don't you believe in that also?

It also changed with the annihilation of Sodom and Gehmorrah. That was the land that Lot chose when splitting up from Abraham. It was a lush and fertaile land and afterwards a wasteland. That area today still shows sulfur balls from that time.

But the bible says that one day it will return to the lush land it was. Also that it was like the Garden of Eden.
Then there's the prophecy (Ezekiel 47:8-9) that speaks of the 'Dead Sea' teaming with life again.

I've considered this, but this still would not work. The Nile flows down into Egypt, and the Euphrates flows down from Armenia, which, geographically speaking, would be impossible to connect, even in a Pangea kind of sense.

The flood is based off of Mesopotamian myths too.

I don't understand why we have to make special, yet unsupported, exceptions to situations where it conflicts with real history, geography, etc. We should just accept that many biblical descriptions simply doesn't work literally.

 

[Lulav]

I've considered this, but this still would not work. The Nile flows down into Egypt, and the Euphrates flows down from Armenia, which, geographically speaking, would be impossible to connect, even in a Pangea kind of sense.

Actually the Nile flows up.

The flood is based off of Mesopotamian myths too.

Do you regard anything from antiquity to be of truth?

I don't understand why we have to make special, yet unsupported, exceptions to situations where it conflicts with real history, geography, etc. We should just accept that many biblical descriptions simply doesn't work literally.

For over 40 years now I've come to look at things from this perspective.

First and foremost I believe in God
Secondly I believe he is Righteous above all righteousness
Third, If I read something in the Bible that doesn't make sense from viewing it from
the two things above, I realize it's not the Bible, It's not God, but me.

I struggled with a certain part and couldn't see how these things I read could reconcile with what I believed
About HIM. I confessed I did not believe He was unrighteous but I couldn't understand how and asked that
He show me. And He did, in a miraculous way that couldn't be denied. I won't go into details so please don't ask
but it's formed my understanding of these conundrums that one comes upon that stymies oneself.

 

[Lukamu]

The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. ~Gen 2:9

The word translated there in Genesis 'evil' is the same word used in the Isaiah passage.

'ra' is the Hebrew for 'evil' Resh Ayin רָ֑ע

The translators like to make it sound different like using words like 'wicked', 'distressed', 'calamity', etc

And the same word in Isaiah 31:2 so it looks like it can be translated either way. I don't believe that man's "evil" and God's "evil" are interchangeable though. Edit: and in Numbers 11:1, which is stronger evidence that "ra" can mean adversity.

 

[Jonaitis]

Actually the Nile flows up.

I mean, technically this is true. Doesn't change exactly what I meant. You are correct though.

Do you regard anything from antiquity to be of truth?

I have been trying to figure this out for a while now. The farther back you read, the more legendary and mythical the text becomes.

For over 40 years now I've come to look at things from this perspective.

First and foremost I believe in God
Secondly I believe he is Righteous above all righteousness
Third, If I read something in the Bible that doesn't make sense from viewing it from
the two things above, I realize it's not the Bible, It's not God, but me.

I struggled with a certain part and couldn't see how these things I read could reconcile with what I believed
About HIM. I confessed I did not believe He was unrighteous but I couldn't understand how and asked that
He show me. And He did, in a miraculous way that couldn't be denied. I won't go into details so please don't ask
but it's formed my understanding of these conundrums that one comes upon that stymies oneself.

I believe in God too, but I am convinced that we are interpreting biblical historically differently than how the original authors intended it to be read. History was not linear the way we have it today, this is something so oft neglected.

 

[Lulav]

I've considered this, but this still would not work. The Nile flows down into Egypt, and the Euphrates flows down from Armenia, which, geographically speaking, would be impossible to connect, even in a Pangea kind of sense.

We may not have all the science and current understanding to say what's in Gen 2 is untrue.

This is something to consider:

10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden;​

and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. ​

​

(Separated or divided is a better word used for translation)​

​

​

While the verses seemingly indicate that the rivers all flow from the same source, this is clearly not the case. It has been suggested that the Hebrew word for “separated,” יפרד, can also be understood as “lost or missing.” According to this approach, the river sunk into the ground at the exit of the Garden of Eden, and later reappeared at four distinct locations. The verse now reads, “A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it was lost (sunk into the ground) and (later reemerged and) became four heads.”


It has further been pointed out that the four rivers are referred to as four heads and not four branches, which may imply that they are not four branches of the same river, but rather four distinct riverheads.

 

[Jonaitis]

We may not have all the science and current understanding to say what's in Gen 2 is untrue.

This is something to consider:

10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden;​

and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. ​

​

(Separated or divided is a better word used for translation)​

​

​

While the verses seemingly indicate that the rivers all flow from the same source, this is clearly not the case. It has been suggested that the Hebrew word for “separated,” יפרד, can also be understood as “lost or missing.” According to this approach, the river sunk into the ground at the exit of the Garden of Eden, and later reappeared at four distinct locations. The verse now reads, “A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it was lost (sunk into the ground) and (later reemerged and) became four heads.”


It has further been pointed out that the four rivers are referred to as four heads and not four branches, which may imply that they are not four branches of the same river, but rather four distinct riverheads.

Did you know that Edin in Sumerian means "steppe or plain"? It is a placename of an ancient region wherein a watercourse flowed through the area. Does that sound familiar? It says in the text that in Eden, which has a different meaning, a river went out of the area and watered the whole garden. This is of no coincidence.

It is actually not uncommon to find Hebrew alternative meanings of words used by other Semitic groups in the area. We read in the story of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:9) that "Bab-el" is similar to the word "confusion" in Hebrew (likely Paleo-Hebrew), but in Akkadian, it means "City of God." The etymology is more appropriate in the Akkadian usage than in the Hebrew, and likely a distortion was employed by the authors of Genesis to fit their specific narrative.

This is the classic case of Rome stealing the gods and culture of Greece.

There is so much to unpack right now, I currently don't have the maximum brain power, but it is quite common to find Hebrew alternative meanings to words and placenames of regions that are historically attested linguistically in other records.

 

[Lulav]

And the same word in Isaiah 31:2 so it looks like it can be translated either way. I don't believe that man's "evil" and God's "evil" are interchangeable though. Edit: and in Numbers 11:1, which is stronger evidence that "ra" can mean adversity.

I would go with the foundational meaning from Genesis 2

ra is well known to those who understand Hebrew to mean 'evil'. Now what determines evil is another question. But one thing we can infer from this tree is that it contained the knowledge of two opposites.

In Numbers it is translated by many words, and in many cases not at all.

NIV - Now the people complained about their hardships in the hearing of the LORD
ESV - And the people complained in the hearing of the LORD about their misfortunes,
KJV - And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD:
NASB - Now the people became like those who complain of adversity in the ears of the LORD;
AB - Now the people became like those who complain and whine about their hardships,
ASV - And the people were as murmurers, speaking evil in the ears of Jehovah:
Aramaic in Plain English - And when the people were complaining, it was evil before LORD JEHOVAH
JPS - And the people were as murmurers, speaking evil in the ears of the LORD;


Ra, means evil and in Isaiah that is the word used. You can compare it to the opposite used there, Shalom

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

He says here 'create evil' this is the same word, 'bara' used in the creation story. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

 

[Lulav]

Did you know that Edin in Sumerian means "steppe or plain"? It is a placename of an ancient region wherein a watercourse flowed through the area. Does that sound familiar? It says in the text that in Eden, which has a different meaning, a river went out of the area and watered the whole garden. This is of no coincidence.

It is actually not uncommon to find Hebrew alternative meanings of words used by other Semitic groups in the area. We read in the story of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:9) that "Bab-el" is similar to the word "confusion" in Hebrew (likely Paleo-Hebrew), but in Akkadian, it means "City of God." The etymology is more appropriate in the Akkadian usage than in the Hebrew, and likely a distortion was employed by the authors of Genesis to fit their specific narrative.

This is the classic case of Rome stealing the gods and culture of Greece.

There is so much to unpack right now, I currently don't have the maximum brain power, but it is quite common to find Hebrew alternative meanings to words and placenames of regions that are historically attested linguistically in other records.

There will always be a choice and a test.

 

[Diamond72]

Genesis 2 is what is called a "frame story".

Genesis 2 is historical because it begins 6,000 years ago. There seems to be exactly 4,000 years from Adam to Jesus. Everyone has their own opinion about time in Genesis chapter one.

 

[AV1611VET]

Genesis 2 is historical because it begins 6,000 years ago.

Quite right, my friend.

There seems to be exactly 4,000 years from Adam to Jesus.

If I remember correctly, the Millennium Sabbath theory teaches that God created the universe in six days, indicative of one-thousand year periods, and that it was 2000 years from Adam to Abraham, 2000 years from Abraham to Jesus, and 2000 years to the beginning of the Millennium, which will last 1000 years and complete the template set in Genesis.

Is that what you're alluding to?

Everyone has their own opinion about time in Genesis chapter one.

Mine is that time in Genesis is a literal 24-hour period, established as one rotation of the earth on its axis.

The Millennium Sabbath theory uses Peter's comment as its basis for time.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

 

[Diamond72]

Now what determines evil is another question.

It is best to look at the verse were a word is first used. Genesis 6:5 "And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." We see that evil involved the imagination and it also involves the eyes. This is what the r & a represent in the Hebrew. Imagination, thoughts & heart are three word, but they pretty much represent the same thing. What our eyes see and our heart desires grabs a hold of us. This is why we are to have a pure heart before God. He gives us the desires of our heart, so we should have good, pure desires. Wickedness is rā-‘aṯ, Evil is ra‘