The order of creation: why?

[JohnJones]

In Genesis we find the order of creation to be:

DAY 1: Heaven and Earth created. Light and Darkness separated.
DAY 2: The "firmament" (sky) created.
DAY 3: Dry Land and Sea separated. Grass, Trees, Plants created.
DAY 4: Sun, Moon, Stars established.
DAY 5: Everyhting that lives in water or flies created.
DAY 6: Land animals created. Man created after God's own image.

Now, my question is simply this:

If you believe in theistic evolution, why does God give the order of creation this way? Why does He say that He created grass before fish, when evolution says that fish came before grass? Why does He say He created all sea creatures at the same time, when evolution says that fish evolved into land animals and some of these land animals went back to the sea and became whales? Why does He say He created the earth before the Sun when cosmic evolution claims that the sun evolved before the earth? Why does God Give an order of creation at all if it is not literal? What is the possible homiletic value of an order of creation?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

why does God give the order of creation this way?

--->the short answer is the two sets of triads.
see: http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/framework.gif
first God creates the conditions-these kingdoms, carefully setting things up right, then He fills them-populates.

What is the possible homiletic value of an order of creation?

-->an example of Providence. God's careful provision in order that things can live.
see Framework interpretation of Gen 1 for much more.

the long answer is how is there light before the sun.
how are there days or morning/evening combinations before the earth or it's rotation.
or other discontinuities even the rabbi's spoke about 2K years ago, if you take it as historical scientific ordering.

the gif is from:
http://blueletterbible.org/faq/creation.html
i stored it locally so i wouldnt use their bandwidth.

 

[ethos]

In Genesis we find the order of creation to be:

DAY 1: Heaven and Earth created. Light and Darkness separated.
DAY 2: The "firmament" (sky) created.
DAY 3: Dry Land and Sea separated. Grass, Trees, Plants created.
DAY 4: Sun, Moon, Stars established.
DAY 5: Everyhting that lives in water or flies created.
DAY 6: Land animals created. Man created after God's own image.

Now, my question is simply this:

If you believe in theistic evolution, why does God give the order of creation this way? Why does He say that He created grass before fish, when evolution says that fish came before grass? Why does He say He created all sea creatures at the same time, when evolution says that fish evolved into land animals and some of these land animals went back to the sea and became whales? Why does He say He created the earth before the Sun when cosmic evolution claims that the sun evolved before the earth? Why does God Give an order of creation at all if it is not literal? What is the possible homiletic value of an order of creation?

I agree 100 per cent JohnJones; and by the way, I keep hearing from some on this forum that Adam was really not the first man. In fact, some here don't believe that Adam existed at all. I would ask them this question as I already have in another thread. Why does scripture spend so much effort to define the lineage and time line, starting with Seth and ending with Christ. Why others here don't seem to understand the point of this scriptural exercise, I can't begin to understand. There is a verse however that discribes this attitude: there is none so blind as he who will not see. God bless JohnJones.

 

[JohnJones]

first God creates the conditions-these kingdoms, carefully setting things up right, then He fills them-populates.

What is that supposed to mean? I have a feeling that you are trying to say that on each day God setup parameters for a certain kingdom to evolve within. If that is what you are saying, that still does not get you around the fact that the order of creation differs from the accepted order of evolution. If you are saying that God setup the parameters for grass to evolve and then let grass evolve before He setup the parameters for fish to evolve and then let fish evolve, you are still disagreeing with evolution as commonly established. You might as well scrap evolution altogether and accept the word of God as is, if you are not going to accept evolution as is. Did God really create grass before fish? Did He really create fish and whales at the same time? The Bible says so. Now you have to decide what you are going to do: (1) Keep believing in evolution but "change" the order of evolution to fit the Bible (2) Accept the Bible

ethos: thanks; God bless you too.

 

[notto]

If you believe in theistic evolution, why does God give the order of creation this way? Why does He say that He created grass before fish, when evolution says that fish came before grass? Why does He say He created all sea creatures at the same time, when evolution says that fish evolved into land animals and some of these land animals went back to the sea and became whales? Why does He say He created the earth before the Sun when cosmic evolution claims that the sun evolved before the earth? Why does God Give an order of creation at all if it is not literal? What is the possible homiletic value of an order of creation?

Because the Genesis story was inspired by mans relationship with God and creation and wasn't an eyewitness account. God doesn't give the order of creation. God inspired man to write about God's creation and man gives the order that is written in the account. We can't blame men 3000 years ago for not having the physical descriptions correct but they nailed the relationship with God and creation. This is what should concern us.

When our interpretation of the bible conflicts with what we know about the actual creation, we can always assume that it is our interpretation of the bible that is wrong.

 

[gluadys]

In Genesis we find the order of creation to be:

DAY 1: Heaven and Earth created. Light and Darkness separated.
DAY 2: The "firmament" (sky) created.
DAY 3: Dry Land and Sea separated. Grass, Trees, Plants created.
DAY 4: Sun, Moon, Stars established.
DAY 5: Everyhting that lives in water or flies created.
DAY 6: Land animals created. Man created after God's own image.

Now, my question is simply this:

If you believe in theistic evolution, why does God give the order of creation this way? ... Why does God Give an order of creation at all if it is not literal?

Why not? I don't see the point of the question.

What is the possible homiletic value of an order of creation?

Given that Genesis 1 is based on the Sumerian classic Enuma Elish, the homoletic value of this order, at the time Genesis was written was very important indeed. Genesis follows the same order but does something very important with it.

In Sumerian legend, the order of creation was determined by the relationships and status of the gods. Light and dark come from the oldest gods. The firmament is the divided body of Tiamat, the mother of Marduk, whom he slew in battle, and whose body he used to create the earth and sky.

Marduk is the chief of the newer gods and the one most closely associated with vegetation and fertility. His younger siblings are the Sun & Moon. Lesser gods rule the air and seas and land. Humans were not even part of the creation at first, but were made to relieve the younger gods of the burden of serving all the gods. Made to be slaves of the gods.

Now look at what the author of Genesis says. Keeping to the same story format his listeners were already familiar with, he does not attirbute different creative events to this god or that. He says over and over again "God said: ...and it was so." God, the God of Israel made day and night, heaven and earth...not some Sumerian or Babylonian gods. God, the God of Israel, not Marduk, may vegetation and caused it to reproduce. God, the God of Israel, not Marduk's brother and sister, made the Sun and Moon and stars.

These are not things to be worshipped, they are things made by the God of Israel.

And when it comes to humanity, the creation of humanity is not an afterthought, nor are humans destined to be slaves of the gods. On the contrary, everything leads up to humanity and humanity is given the role of ruler over all the living things on earth.

Linguistic analysis of Genesis sets the writing of the first chapter during the height of the Babylonian empire, possibly during the Babylonian exile. But I won't argue the time of writing. The point is the same as if Moses wrote it.

The strength of gods in those days was commonly judged by the strength of the populations that worshipped them. When Judea was conquered and her people exiled, it would be expected that they would acknowledge the superiority of the Babylonian pantheon.

Genesis asserts the authority of the God of Israel over all other gods. It denies that any other god had a role in creation or that any facet of creation is to be worshipped in place of the Creator.

In that time and place, that was a most important homiletical value. Nor is it one we should ignore today.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

What is that supposed to mean? I have a feeling that you are trying to say that on each day God setup parameters for a certain kingdom to evolve within. If that is what you are saying, that still does not get you around the fact that the order of creation differs from the accepted order of evolution. If you are saying that God setup the parameters for grass to evolve and then let grass evolve before He setup the parameters for fish to evolve and then let fish evolve, you are still disagreeing with evolution as commonly established. You might as well scrap evolution altogether and accept the word of God as is, if you are not going to accept evolution as is. Did God really create grass before fish? Did He really create fish and whales at the same time? The Bible says so. Now you have to decide what you are going to do: (1) Keep believing in evolution but "change" the order of evolution to fit the Bible (2) Accept the Bible

ethos: thanks; God bless you too.

a picture is supposed to be worth a thousand words.
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/framework.gif

there is a nice FI essay at:
http://home.comcast.net/~babucher/bucher-framework_interp_working.html

plus the link at:
http://blueletterbible.org/faq/creation.html

or a list of books at:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...RX8/ref=cm_aya_av.lm_more/102-7154910-1108153

any of which will answer your questions.
i personally like:
The Genesis Debate : Three Views on the Days of Creation
as a starting point.

btw
order of creation differs from the accepted order of evolution ==>literary is not the same as historical....FI is a literary framework, not a scientific or historical one, contra YECism

 

[PaladinValer]

Vegetation, then fishes, then amphibians and reptiles, then flying creatures and birds, then mammals, then modern humans?

Sounds like evolution to me

 

[SBG]

God doesn't give the order of creation.

Can you prove this?

When our interpretation of the bible conflicts with what we know about the actual creation, we can always assume that it is our interpretation of the bible that is wrong.

I just can't seem to agree with this type of thinking.

The same thing keeps coming to mind: is the Bible correct that we shouldn't be children going back and forth in doctrine, or is it wrong and we should do so with every change that science makes and interpret the Bible accordingly.

What do we know of the actual creation? You said in this post no one was actually there and we shouldn't blame the writers of the Bible for getting it wrong. Since you believe the Biblical writers, Moses in fact who walked with God, were wrong, you believe the many scientists of which some will vehemently argue there is no God are correct?

As a Christian I cannot follow your logic: That Moses who was God's chosen man for writing the first five books of the Bible, and leading the Israelites was wrong about how God created, but ones who say there is no God are in fact correct about evolution/big bang/abiogenesis; thus being how God created.

God's chosen vessel wrong, God's enemy correct. Odd logic I believe. But then you will say there are Christians who also say evolution is correct. And I would answer with the following:

Matthew 24:22
" If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened."

Christians are not beyond being lead away from the truth.

I am not fond of this type of discussion, but your last sentence bothers me quite a bit. I cannot be quiet while you try and teach others that if the world tells us something that conflicts with our Biblical interpretation, then we need to change our interpretation.



1 Timothy 4:16
" Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers."


1 Timothy 6:3-4
"If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to Godly teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing."

Titus 1:9
"He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it."

Ephesians 4:14
"Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming."

 

[SBG]

a picture is supposed to be worth a thousand words.
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/framework.gif

Where is the picture that says man rules over the animals? I think one conviently added animals and man as co-rulers instead of being Biblical correct and have man rule over animals box.

After seeing that, i am not sure why one would trust what else you would post (external sources that is) since this one is obviously not Biblical.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Where is the picture that says man rules over the animals? I think one conviently added animals and man as co-rulers instead of being Biblical correct and have man rule over animals box.

After seeing that, i am not sure why one would trust what else you would post (external sources that is) since this one is obviously not Biblical.

i believe you mis-interpreted the gif.
animals rule over the land.
man rules over the plants.

from another link:

Days 3/6
Days three and six are special for several reasons that will be examined more fully below. Here we note that man is not only to rule over the land and vegetation, but over all the birds, fish, cattle, and things that creep on the earth. Man is the consummation of God's creation. He is Yahweh's vassal-king.[16]

Day 7
Finally, God is enthroned as the Creator King, the overlord above all things he has created.
from: http://home.comcast.net/~babucher/bucher-framework_interp_working.html

i think you misunderstood the animals before man in the righthand box. that is the order in Genesis, not the priority or kingship relationship.
man rules over creation as vice-regent under God.

but feel free to elaborate on why you think this gif is not-Biblical. the triads are an important conception in FI, and worth the time to understand.

 

[SBG]

i believe you mis-interpreted the gif.
animals rule over the land.
man rules over the plants.

from another link:

Days 3/6
Days three and six are special for several reasons that will be examined more fully below. Here we note that man is not only to rule over the land and vegetation, but over all the birds, fish, cattle, and things that creep on the earth. Man is the consummation of God's creation. He is Yahweh's vassal-king.[16]

Day 7
Finally, God is enthroned as the Creator King, the overlord above all things he has created.
from: http://home.comcast.net/~babucher/bucher-framework_interp_working.html

i think you misunderstood the animals before man in the righthand box. that is the order in Genesis, not the priority or kingship relationship.
man rules over creation as vice-regent under God.

but feel free to elaborate on why you think this gif is not-Biblical. the triads are an important conception in FI, and worth the time to understand.

I misunderstood then, my apologies. I am having such an off day today, it seems I keep missing alot of things, lol. I'm sorry about that.

 

[JohnJones]

When our interpretation of the bible conflicts with what we know about the actual creation, we can always assume that it is our interpretation of the bible that is wrong.

When our interpretation of "actual creation" conflicts with the Bible, we are practicing "junk science," but the Bible is still right.

 

[Vance]

When our interpretation of "actual creation" conflicts with the Bible, we are practicing "junk science," but the Bible is still right.

Again, that begs the question of what the Bible is saying. Nothing I believe in conflicts with the proper reading of the Bible. If it did, I wouldn't believe it.