Pyramids and the flood

[Job 33:6]

Those two paragraphs contradict each other. In the first, you say, "There is no thing that God has not created, that exists before God created," and in the second you assert that that doesn't mean that nothing was present beforehand. That seems totally illogical.

But sand isn't nothing, is it?

The bible does not say that God created like a child on the beach building a sandcastle using pre-existing sand, and probably a pre-existing bucket and spade!

Here, this might help you understand "nothing" in ex materia terms:

Strong's Hebrew: 8414. תֹּ֫הוּ (tohu) -- Formlessness, emptiness, confusion, chaos, nothingness

tohu: Formlessness, emptiness, confusion, chaos, nothingness

The Hebrew word "tohu" is often used to describe a state of formlessness or emptiness. It conveys a sense of chaos or disorder, often in a primordial or desolate context. In the Bible, "tohu" is used to depict the initial state of the earth before God's creative order was established, as well as to describe desolation or confusion in a metaphorical sense.

ancient Near Eastern cosmology, the concept of chaos was prevalent, often depicted as a primordial state that needed to be ordered by divine intervention. The Hebrew Bible reflects this understanding, presenting God as the one who brings order out of chaos. The use of "tohu" in the biblical text underscores the power and sovereignty of God in transforming disorder into a structured and purposeful creation.

NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from an unused word
Definition
formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness
NASB Translation
chaos (1), confusion (1), desolation (1), emptiness (1), empty space (1), formless (2), futile (2), futile things (1), meaningless (2), meaningless arguments (1), nothing (2), waste (3), waste place (2).

In ex materia terms, this is "nothing".

You have to leave behind the anachronistic perspective of "nothing" in an ex nihilo sense. And think in ex materia terms.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Sand is "nothing" in the old testament. It is tohu wa bohu. That's what nothing is. In Hebrew that's what these terms mean.

It's only illogical if you're stuck in the false dichotomy of "it must be ex nihilo or it's not creation" mindset.

What this whole argument boils down to is, who is your source and whose source is more reliable? That’s basically what this argument is all about.

 

[Job 33:6]

Those two paragraphs contradict each other. In the first, you say, "There is no thing that God has not created, that exists before God created," and in the second you assert that that doesn't mean that nothing was present beforehand. That seems totally illogical.

But sand isn't nothing, is it?

The bible does not say that God created like a child on the beach building a sandcastle using pre-existing sand, and probably a pre-existing bucket and spade!

And I'll just say this plainly. You're stuck in a Greco roman mindset. Rather than a Genesis mindset. Your mind isn't allowing you to think about creation in ex materia terms.

You're thinking "well, the sand, it's there between my toes, it exists! I can feel it! I know it's there!"

And I'm saying, no no, you need to move beyond your ex nihilo anachronistic understandimg of creation, and you need to move into the ancient near east Hebrew understanding of what "nothing" is. Nothing is "tohu wa bohu".

It's "nothing" in terms of meaning and purpose. It's not about materialistic existence.

The sand is indeed "nothing" it is tohu wa bohu, it is "nothingness" as it serves no meaning, no purpose, has no order. No function. It's just sand. There is "nothing" actually there at all. No sand castle has yet been created. Nothing has been created yet at all. It's just desolation and disorder.

 

[BNR32FAN]

And I'll just say this plainly. You're stuck in a Greco roman mindset. Rather than a Genesis mindset. Your mind isn't allowing you to think about creation in ex materia terms.

You're thinking "well, the sand, it's there between my toes, it exists! I can feel it! I know it's there!"

And I'm saying, no no, you need to move beyond your ex nihilo anachronistic understandimg of creation, and you need to move into the ancient near east Hebrew understanding of what "nothing" is. Nothing is "tohu wa bohu".

It's "nothing" in terms of meaning and purpose. It's not about materialistic existence.

The sand is indeed "nothing" it is tohu wa bohu, it is "nothingness" as it serves no meaning, no purpose, has no order. No function. It's just sand. There is "nothing" actually there at all. No sand castle has yet been created. Nothing has been created yet at all. It's just desolation and disorder.

Tohu wa bohu was after the heavens and the earth were created, not before.

 

[David Lamb]

You're repeating the same false dichotomy over and over again by assuming that the only way that something can be created, is if it comes into existence through ex nihilo terms, or "out of nothing".

But again, if you reframe the topic in ex materia terms, before God creates, these "pre-existing materials" as you describe them, don't actually exist. There are not actually "pre existing". They are tohu wa bohu.

It's like, before you make a sandcastle. You could, in a modern ex nihilo perspective say "well the sand is there, I feel it between my toes!".

Well, you have to get out of that ex nihilo mindset and think in ex materia terms. The sandcastle isn't there yet. It's all just tohu wa bohu. There is "nothing" there at all. Just an empty desert. You look around and, it's empty. No people. No animals yet. No trees or birds. No life at all. No houses. No cars or roads, no music, no light. There is no fruit trees. No, restaurants etc.

When you position yourself in an ex materia mindset, "existence" is more about meaning and purpose, than it is about materialistic existence.

And that's why in Genesis, heaven and earth are described as tohu wa bohu. They hadn't been created yet. Earth was created on day 3 for example. Before then, earth wasn't a "thing" it was "nothing" it was tohu wa bohu.

No, what seems wrong to me is you saying that God created everything, but He used pre-existing materials to do so. How could He at the same time be Creator of everything, and use materials that were already in existence to do so? If there were things already in existence before God started creating, then how can He have created all things?

 

[Job 33:6]

No, what seems wrong to me is you saying that God created everything, but He used pre-existing materials to do so. How could He at the same time be Creator of everything, and use materials that were already in existence to do so? If there were things already in existence before God started creating, then how can He have created all things?

Because only that which God creates, is that which exists. This "sand" that you imagine between your toes, that is tohu wa bohu, it is "nothing" and doesn't yet exist. Again, just look at the Hebrew definition of tohu wa bohu.

Only that which is created, exists. Hence how everything is created by God, yet that which is uncreated (the sand) does not exist. It is "nothing".

 

[Job 33:6]

No, what seems wrong to me is you saying that God created everything, but He used pre-existing materials to do so. How could He at the same time be Creator of everything, and use materials that were already in existence to do so? If there were things already in existence before God started creating, then how can He have created all things?

Again, you have to think in ex materia terms, not ex nihilo terms. There is nothing that exists, before God creates it. This "sand" that you imagine as being present before God begins creating, that is tohu wa bohu. It is "nothing". It is not a part of "everything". It does not yet exist.

You have to leave behind this idea that things can only exist or not exist in ex nihilo terms. And think about existing and not existing in ex materia terms. There is only order, and disorder. Well, and there is non-order as well.

But for practical purposes, the sandcastle exists. That is what is created. The pre existing sand has no order. It is tohu wa bohu. It is nothing. It does not exist.

Genesis is about order and disorder. It's not about material existence and non-material existence. It is ex materia not ex nihilo.

 

[Job 33:6]

Tohu wa bohu was after the heavens and the earth were created, not before.

That is incorrect. The heavens and the earth were tohu wa bohu before God created them.

For example, earth is created on day 3. Yet earth is tohu wa bohu at the beginning.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSV
[1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Genesis 1:9-10 NRSV
[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

In the beginning when God created the earth...the earth was tohu wa bohu.

In the beginning when George created the sandcastle, it was nothing. It was tohu wa bohu.

George then formed the sandcastle and then George called it "sand castle" and it was good.

It's only good after God creates it.

 

[Job 33:6]

Tohu wa bohu was after the heavens and the earth were created, not before.

And remember. Creation occurs over 6 days. Creation doesn't happen in verse 1 and then the rest of the 6 days God is no longer creating.

Earth is tohu wa bohu, and in 6 days, God creates the earth, and then by the end of the 6 days, it is no longer tohu wa bohu, and it is "good".

Saying that the earth was tohu wa bohu after God created them is a backwards understanding of Genesis. That's the exact opposite of what God was accomplishing during the 6 days.

When God completed creation, it was "good" it was no longer tohu wa bohu.

And if you repeat something this blatantly false again, I'll just start ignoring you. The things you are saying are so obviously incorrect, that I'm not even sure how you could even say them.

As if God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days, and at the end of the 6 days it was "very good" and yet for whatever reason, it was a formless waste. How could someone conclude something so obviously wrong?

This is a rhetorical question, don't feel like you need to answer.

 

[BNR32FAN]

That is incorrect. The heavens and the earth were tohu wa bohu before God created them.

For example, earth is created on day 3. Yet earth is tohu wa bohu at the beginning.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSV
[1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Genesis 1:9-10 NRSV
[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

In the beginning when God created the earth...the earth was tohu wa bohu.

In the beginning when George created the sandcastle, it was nothing. It was tohu wa bohu.

George then formed the sandcastle and then George called it "sand castle" and it was good.

It's only good after God creates it.

Ok so you’re just going to skip over Colossians 1:16-17 like they don’t even exist? Why are you skipping my post about this passage?

“For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭16‬-‭17‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Colossians 1:16-17 says that God created all things and He existed before all things which means that there was a time when nothing existed.

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok so you’re just going to skip over Colossians 1:16-17 like they don’t even exist? Why are you skipping my post about this passage?

“For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭16‬-‭17‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Colossians 1:16-17 says that God created all things and He existed before all things which means that there was a time when nothing existed.

Colossians is not Genesis. It's a different book of the Bible. Written in a different time. Different place. Different cultural context. Different historical and philosophical context. In a different language, to a different audience etc.

Just because the New Testament authors comment broadly on Creation, that doesn't mean they are attempting to retell Genesis, nor does it mean that Genesis says what they are saying at a later period of time.

Ex nihilo thought of the Greco roman world, is an anachronism if you read it backwards into the old testament. Ancient Israelites did not think in ex nihilo terms. That's not their culture.

And the typical YEC response again, is complete nonsense, that the Bible fell out of the sky, and that the Bible therefore has no cultural context. Ok, well again, that's just dishonesty. No one who actually takes the context of the Bible seriously would agree.

This approach to scripture, that every book of the Bible has the same cultural context, is just dishonest.

It's like you guys can't make your argument from the old testament, so you have to jump out of the old testament, and run to the new testament (written centuries later in a different context) and read it backwards into the OT. Well, I'm sorry but that's not an honest approach to the Bible.

 

[WatchmanofGod]

When were the pyramids built? Was it before or after the flood?

Honestly I have to believe the Nephilim and demons had a lot to do with building that. There is no way humans alone count do it.

And the physical evidence for such a flood is even weaker.

ummm.. incorrect

 

[BNR32FAN]

That is incorrect. The heavens and the earth were tohu wa bohu before God created them.

For example, earth is created on day 3. Yet earth is tohu wa bohu at the beginning.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSV
[1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Genesis 1:9-10 NRSV
[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

In the beginning when God created the earth...the earth was tohu wa bohu.

In the beginning when George created the sandcastle, it was nothing. It was tohu wa bohu.

George then formed the sandcastle and then George called it "sand castle" and it was good.

It's only good after God creates it.

What is the point of this interpretation? Is it to insert 4.5 billion years into the age of the earth? Whats the point of trying to get 4.5 billion years into the age of the earth when you still have the sun, moon, stars, and all life on the earth still only going back 6,000 years according to the Bible? What is the purpose of the creation account? What is the definition of the word Genesis? Why begin the creation account of the earth with the earth already partly created? Your interpretation is illogical. The definition of the word Genesis means the origin of something being brought into existence. It just doesn’t make any sense to begin the story mid way thru the creation process. Your interpretation still doesn’t line up with science because you still have stars that scientists claim are billions of years old, you still have the moon that scientists say is 4.5 billion years old, you still have the existence of man that scientists say are millions of years old, and the existence of plants and animals that scientists say are millions of years old yet the scriptures say that all of these are only 6,000 years old. So this interpretation accomplishes nothing.

 

[AaronClaricus]

Honestly I have to believe the Nephilim and demons had a lot to do with building that. There is no way humans alone count do it.

ummm.. incorrect

The Ziggurat of Ur was built by a "mighty man" Shulgi which is another term for Nephilim.

 

[Diamond72]

Honestly I have to believe the Nephilim and demons had a lot to do with building that. There is no way humans alone count do it.

It is amazing what our unconscious mind can do. Our eyes are very close together but far enough apart for depth perception. My son is a computer engineer. He could not come close to doing the math our unconscious mind does in a instant.

When we study archeology man did evolve from a hunter gather to a food producer very rapidly. The bible says that God breathed the breath of life into Adam. It is the breath of life that makes a difference.

The amazing thing is that there were pillars before prymids. That is difficult to figure out. Göbekli Tepe is actually thousands of years older. Megaliths: The site features large circular structures supported by massive T-shaped stone pillars, some of which are over 16 feet tall and weigh up to 50 tons.

Even the Towers of Tell Qaramel in Syria is older but we do not see pillars there.

 

[Diamond72]

The Flood in which Noah plays a pivotal role was not a local flood. It was pan-global.

There was world wide flooding at the time from the ice melting.

Absolutely, the occurrence of Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs) at the time of Noah, or the early Holocene period, is a possibility. The melting of glaciers and the formation of temporary natural dams could have led to significant flooding events. These GLOFs might have inspired ancient flood myths, including the story of Noah's Flood.

The combination of postglacial sea-level rise and sudden catastrophic floods due to natural dam failures would have created dramatic and potentially devastating events for early human communities, influencing their oral traditions and stories.

 

[Apple Sky]

There was world wide flooding at the time from the ice melting.

Check out 'Ringwoodite'. Now, people are only just realizing that there’s a massive ocean hidden under the Earth’s crust.

Also I reckon the pyramids were built before the great flood by the Nephilim ( Giants ), unless they had the technology to levitate large stones who else could have built them ?

 

[Doug Brents]

There was world wide flooding at the time from the ice melting.

So you were there and saw this, so you know the mechanism God used to cause the Flood?
It was not "world wide flooding", it was a single Flood that covered the entire globe to a depth of fifteen cubits, a cubit being estimated at about 18 inches, so a depth of twenty two and a half (22.5) feet.

Absolutely, the occurrence of Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs) at the time of Noah, or the early Holocene period, is a possibility. The melting of glaciers and the formation of temporary natural dams could have led to significant flooding events. These GLOFs might have inspired ancient flood myths, including the story of Noah's Flood.

So now you're saying the Flood in Scripture is a myth? That helps me categorize everything you have said, or will say in the future. Thank you for giving me clarity on the gibberish you have been posting.

The combination of postglacial sea-level rise and sudden catastrophic floods due to natural dam failures would have created dramatic and potentially devastating events for early human communities, influencing their oral traditions and stories.

The Word of God is not local oral traditions, or simple stories about local events. There is ample evidence all over the globe of deep sea life in impossible areas (peaks of mountains, etc.), that demonstrates a single, world encompassing, aquatic event (the Flood).

 

[Diamond72]

So you were there and saw this, so you know the mechanism God used to cause the Flood?

Some philosophical views propose that human souls are eternal and existed before physical creation, but this is not a mainstream Christian belief and varies across different philosophies and religions.

Many people find ways to harmonize science and biblical teachings, seeing them as complementary rather than conflicting.

If you think Science and the Bible conflict then maybe you do not understand Science or maybe you do not understand the Bible.

We all need to pray and be lead by the Holy Spirit of God in what we believe. He is our Guide and our Teacher.

So now you're saying the Flood in Scripture is a myth?

You seem to be saying you have a reading comprehension issue.

The Word of God is not local oral traditions

Now you want to talk about oral tradition? The Rabbi that we get our Bible from can better explain that. Revelation 7 4 says there are 144,000 of them. So you can get your information from them.

 

[Doug Brents]

Some philosophical views propose that human souls are eternal and existed before physical creation, but this is not a mainstream Christian belief and varies across different philosophies and religions.

Some philosophical views propose that Satan is the master. Just because someone has a view does not make it correct.

Many people find ways to harmonize science and biblical teachings, seeing them as complementary rather than conflicting.

If you think Science and the Bible conflict then maybe you do not understand Science or maybe you do not understand the Bible.

The question is, which one is fluid, and which one is solid and foundational.
You seem to think that "Science" is foundational, and we should interpret the Scripture based on what we "discover" through science.
I believe it is exactly opposite: Scripture is foundational, and we should interpret what we "discover" through science by what we read in the Bible.

We all need to pray and be lead by the Holy Spirit of God in what we believe. He is our Guide and our Teacher.

He does not seem to be your guide and teacher, based upon what you have posted here.

You seem to be saying you have a reading comprehension issue.

You said that "These GLOFs might have inspired ancient flood myths, including the story of Noah's Flood." There is no reading comprehension error here. You are saying that the story of Noah's Flood is a myth, and that it was only a local event, not a world wide destruction of every life but eight (those in the Ark).

Now you want to talk about oral tradition? The Rabbi that we get our Bible from can better explain that. Revelation 7 4 says there are 144,000 of them. So you can get your information from them.

Oh my! The error in that sentence is so deep, I don't even know where to start. Good by 72. You have wasted enough of my time.