Two creations?

[ClearSky]

The world described in Genesis 1 through 7 obviously differs from our world in several aspects:

- Day light was not emitted by the sun (Gen 1:5)
- Space was filled with water (Gen 1:7)
- The earth was inside a vault that hold the waters apart (Gen 1:7)
- Sun and moon are lights fixed to the firmament (Gen 1:17)
- All animals were vegetarian (Gen 1:30)
- The snake was the most intelligent animal (Gen 3:1)
- The average human life span was 900 years (Gen 5:4)

and so on. The usual way to deal with this for Creationists is to re-interpret the Bible until it fits the YEC world view, or the OEC world view, or something inbetween. However, one has to admit that it does not really fit any of the Creationist world views. So I ask myself: What if Genesis was meant literally, and we don't need to re-interpret it?

Today we obviously live in a different world, so there had to be a second creation then. The time when this happened could have been the Flood. In our world the Flood would have been impossible, there is not enough water on earth and it is hard to imagine how all the animals on the Ark could have survived for 7 months. However, all of this could still have happened when we assume that God not only covered his creation with water, but destroyed it and created a new world, our world.

Noah could have survived in some area where time was stopped, and God could have used tools such as Big Bang and Evolution for the second creation.

What do you think of this idea? This would allow a literal understanding of Genesis and at the same time solve all the scientific and historical problems of the YEC world view.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

The world described in Genesis 1 through 7 obviously differs from our world in several aspects:

- Day light was not emitted by the sun (Gen 1:5)
- Space was filled with water (Gen 1:7)
- The earth was inside a vault that hold the waters apart (Gen 1:7)
- Sun and moon are lights fixed to the firmament (Gen 1:17)
- All animals were vegetarian (Gen 1:30)
- The snake was the most intelligent animal (Gen 3:1)
- The average human life span was 900 years (Gen 5:4)

and so on. The usual way to deal with this for Creationists is to re-interpret the Bible until it fits the YEC world view, or the OEC world view, or something inbetween. However, one has to admit that it does not really fit any of the Creationist world views. So I ask myself: What if Genesis was meant literally, and we don't need to re-interpret it?

Today we obviously live in a different world, so there had to be a second creation then. The time when this happened could have been the Flood. In our world the Flood would have been impossible, there is not enough water on earth and it is hard to imagine how all the animals on the Ark could have survived for 7 months. However, all of this could still have happened when we assume that God not only covered his creation with water, but destroyed it and created a new world, our world.

Noah could have survived in some area where time was stopped, and God could have used tools such as Big Bang and Evolution for the second creation.

What do you think of this idea? This would allow a literal understanding of Genesis and at the same time solve all the scientific and historical problems of the YEC world view.

It is true that at first the light was not from the sun but from some other source. That changes when God created the sun and other stars and planets on day 4 Genesis 1:14-19. Also we were all made to be vegetarians until after the flood Genesis 9:3. I'm not sure where you got that the average life span was 900 although. I would agree people did live longer before the flood then they did after.

What you propose with stopping time and etc is no where in the Bible. We can start to explain the changes by what is revealed in the Bible. A world flood certainly could lead to a lot of volcanic activity and later on would lead to the ice age that this planet as experienced. What once was a tropical climate is now covered in snow. Plant life was nearly wiped out so it would make sense to allow animals and humans to now eat meat. That would also explain why so many types of animals went extinct shortly after the flood. We still live in the same fallen world that was here before the flood. There just has been a lot of changes that have taken place. It won't be until Jesus comes again to create a new earth that this planet will be done away with Revelations 21:1.

 

[ClearSky]

It is true that at first the light was not from the sun but from some other source. That changes when God created the sun and other stars and planets on day 4 Genesis 1:14-19. Also we were all made to be vegetarians until after the flood Genesis 9:3. I'm not sure where you got that the average life span was 900 although. I would agree people did live longer before the flood then they did after.

What you propose with stopping time and etc is no where in the Bible. We can start to explain the changes by what is revealed in the Bible. A world flood certainly could lead to a lot of volcanic activity and later on would lead to the ice age that this planet as experienced. What once was a tropical climate is now covered in snow.

You're right, the stopping of time is nowhere in the Bible. But assumptions about the disappearance of the original light, the volcanic activity, ice age and so on is also nowhere in the Bible. So we need to fill gaps either way.

What I just suggested was instead of re-interpreting Genesis, filling the gaps in a way that is consistent with both the literal description of the Bible and our scientific observations of the world today.

The average human pre-flood life span is not known, but the life spans the Bible mentions mostly lie in the 900 years range. This arises a problem. Such life spans are not possible with the way modern humans are created. Teeth, bone joints etc. are constructed for lasting about 100 years, not 900 years. So Adam had to be created in a rather different way for being able to walk and chew for 900 years. He certainly looked like a human, but must have had a different skeleton and probably renewable teeth, like sharks.

 

[HypnoToad]

Two separate creations are not needed to explain the differences.

- Day light was not emitted by the sun (Gen 1:5)

Just because Gen. doesn't specifically mention God ending this "unsourced" light doesn't mean God didn't. The sun was made, so the unsourced light was no longer needed, so God just stopped it. It's just a simple, completely logical conclusion. There's no need whatsoever to go beyond that.

- Space was filled with water (Gen 1:7)

First, at this point, space was not organized - the sun, moon, stars, etc., had not yet been formed. But, the matter that would become the heavenly bodies could have been out there at this point. We don't know what type of state it would have been in. It could have been fluidic.

Second, ever wonder why Revelation says the new heaven (or perhaps it is the new earth) has no sea? The sea represented chaos in Hebrew culture. The heavenly bodies not being formed yet means the heavens were, at this point in creation, in a state of chaos.

- The earth was inside a vault that hold the waters apart (Gen 1:7)

I don't see what "vault" you are talking about. The "firmament" is Earth's atmosphere. The "waters" above refer to the chaotic state of the not-yet-formed heavens (as stated above). The "waters" below would/could refer to the state of the earth. Note that land had not yet been separated from the water. The planet, like the heavens, could also have been in some type of fluidic state.

- Sun and moon are lights fixed to the firmament (Gen 1:17)

I don't see where it says they have "fixed" positions.

- All animals were vegetarian (Gen 1:30)

The fall easily explains the change from herbivore to omni/carnivore.

- The snake was the most intelligent animal (Gen 3:1)

Most intelligent because it was a snake, or most intelligent because it was the devil?

- The average human life span was 900 years (Gen 5:4) ...

Such life spans are not possible with the way modern humans are created. Teeth, bone joints etc. are constructed for lasting about 100 years, not 900 years. So Adam had to be created in a rather different way for being able to walk and chew for 900 years. He certainly looked like a human, but must have had a different skeleton and probably renewable teeth, like sharks.

Again, the fall explains this quite easily.

Adam and Eve would have had flawless genomes. Today, due to the corruption of nature, our DNA is corrupted and our bodies don't function nearly as efficiently as Adam & Eve's would have. Also, our environment is getting more and more polluted. We take that junk into our bodies every day.

 

[mark kennedy]

The world described in Genesis 1 through 7 obviously differs from our world in several aspects:

- Day light was not emitted by the sun (Gen 1:5)

There are two lights, on in the original 'big bang' kind of creation mentioned briefly, but in absolute terms, early in the chapter. It does say 'let there be light' before the actual 'creation' of the sun. It seems to me that the sun may well have been in the rough, for lack of a better way of saying it.

There is another possibility, the light of God's glory that filled the Tabernacle and raised Christ from the dead. It's an open question I think but one well worth exploring.

- Space was filled with water (Gen 1:7)

The heavens can mean the entire expanse above the earth including 'space'. It can mean the earth's atmosphere. It can also mean the dwelling place of God. It all depends on the context and in Gen 1:7 I think we had the face of the earth covered with water with thick clouds that blocked all the light from the sun.

- The earth was inside a vault that hold the waters apart (Gen 1:7)

That would appear to be an expression.

- Sun and moon are lights fixed to the firmament (Gen 1:17)

Perhaps the solar system was not originally created with the clock work precision we base our system of time and date on.

- All animals were vegetarian (Gen 1:30)

An interesting possibility that has real merit as an interpretation. Honestly, I'm just not sure one way or the other.

- The snake was the most intelligent animal (Gen 3:1)

Here I expect the term used is more like a proper name then an indication of reptilian form. Nachesh is the word and it is often associated with the occult in the Old Testament.

It can mean a snake, it describes an image of a snake elsewhere and even a flying mythical serpent. It's a lot like the Leviathan or Job or the Red Dragon of Revelations. Here, I don't think it means an actual snake.

- The average human life span was 900 years (Gen 5:4)

That's about right.

and so on. The usual way to deal with this for Creationists is to re-interpret the Bible until it fits the YEC world view, or the OEC world view, or something inbetween. However, one has to admit that it does not really fit any of the Creationist world views. So I ask myself: What if Genesis was meant literally, and we don't need to re-interpret it?

Of course it was meant literally, there isn't any real question about that. Moses obviously considered historical in character and meticulously accurate as a genealogically based narrative. The tendency in modern times is to shy away from indications of supernatural activity.

Today we obviously live in a different world, so there had to be a second creation then. The time when this happened could have been the Flood. In our world the Flood would have been impossible, there is not enough water on earth and it is hard to imagine how all the animals on the Ark could have survived for 7 months. However, all of this could still have happened when we assume that God not only covered his creation with water, but destroyed it and created a new world, our world.

Oh I'll agree that the account of Noah and company is hard to wrap your mind around. I have wrestled with the Exodus, miracles of the prophets and at the top of my personal list, the incarnation. I am not a Christian or a Creationist because need to be but because I am convinced overall of the reliability of Scripture as an historical narrative.

Noah could have survived in some area where time was stopped, and God could have used tools such as Big Bang and Evolution for the second creation.

Time can slow down or accelerate but not the way you are describing. It's interesting to speculate but the Scriptures don't speak of a second creation until after Final Judgment.

What do you think of this idea? This would allow a literal understanding of Genesis and at the same time solve all the scientific and historical problems of the YEC world view.

It's an interesting approach but I don't see how it could reconcile such a broad spectrum of academic conflicts. I don't mean that as a rebuke, I actually think it's perfectly fine to turn something like this over in you mind and consider some of the possibilities.

It's fun and secular cosmologists and physicists have been developing these time/space things for decades. It reminds me of String theory a little. I'll bet if you looked into it you will find that you don't really have to reinvent the wheel to come up with something here. Just compare some of your ideas to String theory and see if there is anything there for you.