When and Where did the first day begin?

[David Lamb]

@David Lamb and don't strawman me, I know you like to do this, I'm watching you

I assure you I am not employing strawman tactics - I always have to look the term up to see what it means. I found, "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument." I may sometimes misunderstand your point in a post, but I certainly don't intentionally misrepresent your position. I apologise if I have given you that impression.

But, there is a difference between God creating a chaotic world and then giving it form, and God taking a chaotic world and creating it by giving it form.

Just as there is a difference between me creating cookies by making them appear out of thin air, and then me giving them form and me simply taking formless cookies and creating them by giving them form.

These are two separate things and I hope that you're able to see that.

Creating=giving form/making
Giving form/making=creating.

When I create cookies, I am making cookies. When I make cookies, I am creating them.

There is no aspect of this equation that involves cookies appearing out of thin air, nor is there any outside parameter. It's just, the cookies were formless when I began making them. That's all.

Just like raw cookie dough is formless when you begin making cookies. And after 6 days, the cookies are finished and they are very good.

It wouldn't make sense to say, he made cookies and then gave them form over 6 days. No no, the 6 days process IS making the cookies. And that making or creating process is not finished until the 6th day (or the 7th).

Genesis 2:1-3 NRSV
[1] Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all their multitude. [2] And on the seventh day God finished the work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done. [3] So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work that he had done in creation.

You see. God didn't finish creating until either the 6th or 7th day, depending on how you think about the process.

But elsewhere we are told that God made all things, not that there was some pre-existing material which He didn't create, but used that to make everything else:

“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.” (Col 1:16 NKJV)

 

[Job 33:6]

Thanks for explaining that. Interesting that NRSV says "formless void" rather than "chaos."

Tohu wa bohu, it's basically the same thing. Chaos, meaningless. Formlessness. Etc.

But yes, that's an awesome observation.

I think this is why we are differing on all this. If you say that God creating is God giving something form, and I say that God creating is Him bringing something into existence, that goes a long way to explaining why you seem so keen to say that creation is ex materia.

Ok. I'll read on...

When we make anything, we must have something to start with. You need flour and other ingredients, a baking tray and an oven to make cookies. God is almighty, and brought things into existence from nothing.,

I mean, rhetoric isn't really going to resolve anything. Simply responding by saying "God did X" doesn't really help the conversation. That's why I reference the text.

So for example, here:
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.

Ex materia, or ex nihilo? I'd say it's pretty clearly ex materia. The waters were gathered and essentially moved off of the land, and then God called the dry land "earth".

Or, let's look at this one:
Genesis 1:6-8 NRSV
[6] And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so. [8] God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

Some people prefer the translation "expanse" and that's fine. But I think the key here is more about this separation. There is water separating and moving apart.

That's taking something that is there, and it's separating or spacing out.

The text is speaking about things moving around. Not really things appearing out of nothing.

 

[Job 33:6]

I assure you I am not employing strawman tactics - I always have to look the term up to see what it means. I found, "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument." I may sometimes misunderstand your point in a post, but I certainly don't intentionally misrepresent your position. I apologise if I have given you that impression.

But elsewhere we are told that God made all things, not that there was some pre-existing material which He didn't create, but used that to make everything else:

“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.” (Col 1:16 NKJV)

Yes. And we've already talked about this too. Colossians isn't inherently repeating the story of Genesis. Dominions and powers for example, has nothing to do with Genesis. So we can't read this text and sort of, read it backwards into Genesis to define what Genesis is. Or we will just be confused.

You have to read the Bible from the beginning like a regular book, you start on page 1 and you read forward. You don't start on page 300, and read backwards.

Otherwise you would have no concept of "incremental revelation" and the old testament wouldn't make any sense.

 

[David Lamb]

Tohu wa bohu, it's basically the same thing. Chaos, meaningless. Formlessness. Etc.

But yes, that's an awesome observation.


Ok. I'll read on...



I mean, rhetoric isn't really going to resolve anything. Simply responding by saying "God did X" doesn't really help the conversation. That's why I reference the text.

So for example, here:
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.

Ex materia, or ex nihilo? I'd say it's pretty clearly ex materia. The waters were gathered and essentially moved off of the land, and then God called the dry land "earth".

Or, let's look at this one:
Genesis 1:6-8 NRSV
[6] And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so. [8] God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

Some people prefer the translation "expanse" and that's fine. But I think the key here is more about this separation. There is water separating and moving apart.

That's taking something that is there, and it's separating or spacing out.

The text is speaking about things moving around. Not really things appearing out of nothing.

But Genesis 1:1 says that God created the heavens and the earth. v2 says that darkness was upon the face of the deep, so that strongly suggests to me that the earth God created included water. When God then said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear,” that wasn't Him creating the waters. He'd already done that. Dry land appeared when parts of the earth were no longer covered with water, as God gathered the water into seas.

 

[Job 33:6]

@David Lamb that's a good subject. I just mentioned it in my last post. But incremental revelation is also an important topic in the Bible. Like Jesus in the old testament. Jesus is never mentioned in the old testament. And so, it's actually improper to read Jesus backwards into it, because that wouldn't be the intent of its original authors to think about Jesus.

So you read the Bible from the start (limited revelation) forward (full revelation). Rather than reading backwards and changing the original perspectives of Moses. If that makes sense.

You can't read the Bible backwards. You have to read it forwards like a regular book.

 

[Job 33:6]

But Genesis 1:1 says that God created the heavens and the earth. v2 says that darkness was upon the face of the deep, so that strongly suggests to me that the earth God created included water.

Try that with the NRSVue.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

There is water there. I'm not sure what you mean. It doesn't say that the deep is the earth or the heavens.

 

[Job 33:6]

. When God then said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear,” that wasn't Him creating the waters. He'd already done that.

That doesn't really work with other translations.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

It doesn't say that anything was already done. The work is not done until the 6th day or the 7th when it says that God finished his work.

Verse 1 is the beginning, it's When God began, it's not after it was done.

Genesis 2:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] Thus the heavens and the earth were finished and all their multitude. [2] On the sixth day God finished the work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done.

 

[Job 33:6]

@David Lamb says: "When God then said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear,” that wasn't Him creating the waters. He'd already done that."

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

It doesn't say that anything was already done in verse 1. The work is not done until the 6th day or the 7th when it says that God finished his work.

Verse 1 is the beginning, it's When God began, it's not after it was done.

Genesis 2:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] Thus the heavens and the earth were finished and all their multitude. [2] On the sixth day God finished the work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done.

If you look at chapter 2:1, and verse 2, this is where it says that the work is done. This is when God is actually finished creating.

And I'd be happy to talk about why this translation, in my opinion, is "better" for this specific topic than the KJV. All translations are good, but they aren't all the same. Some translations are stronger in certain areas than others.

 

[Job 33:6]

I assure you I am not employing strawman tactics - I always have to look the term up to see what it means. I found, "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument." I may sometimes misunderstand your point in a post, but I certainly don't intentionally misrepresent your position. I apologise if I have given you that impression.

Ok! I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time, but I'm watching for repeat offenders. I take notes...you know how these forums are. There's a lot of selective reading, and ducking and dodging. I'll try to understand your thoughts and concerns as well.

 

[David Lamb]

@David Lamb that's a good subject. I just mentioned it in my last post. But incremental revelation is also an important topic in the Bible. Like Jesus in the old testament. Jesus is never mentioned in the old testament. And so, it's actually improper to read Jesus backwards into it, because that wouldn't be the intent of its original authors to think about Jesus.

So you read the Bible from the start (limited revelation) forward (full revelation). Rather than reading backwards and changing the original perspectives of Moses. If that makes sense.

You can't read the Bible backwards. You have to read it forwards like a regular book.

I think you probably meant Colossians, not Collisions

I don't agree with what you say about the bible having to be read in order. We need to see what the whole word of God says about the subject at hand, in this case creation.

 

[Job 33:6]

I think you probably meant Colossians, not Collisions

I don't agree with what you say about the bible having to be read in order. We need to see what the whole word of God says about the subject at hand, in this case creation.I'll give an example.

I'll give an example.

Most people, when they read revelation 12, they think about Satan as leviathan.

Revelation 12:3-4, 7 NET
[3] Then another sign appeared in heaven: a huge red dragon that had seven heads and ten horns, and on its heads were seven diadem crowns. [4] Now the dragon’s tail swept away a third of the stars in heaven and hurled them to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child as soon as it was born.
[7] Then war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back.

Revelation 20:2 NIV
[2] He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.

Revelation 13:1, 11-12 NET
[1] Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, and on its horns were ten diadem crowns, and on its heads a blasphemous name.

And behemoth (in revelation alongside Satan) as well:

[11] Then I saw another beast coming up from the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but was speaking like a dragon. [12] He exercised all the ruling authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and those who inhabit it worship the first beast, the one whose lethal wound had been healed.

Yet here, behemoth is resting in the marshes and under trees like an ox:

Job 40:15, 20-21 NET
[15] “Look now at Behemoth, which I made as I made you; it eats grass like the ox.
[20] For the hills bring it food, where all the wild animals play. [21] Under the lotus trees it lies, in the secrecy of the reeds and the marsh.

Job 40:23 NET
[23] If the river rages, it is not disturbed, it is secure, though the Jordan should surge up to its mouth.

And here, the psalmist is praising God for His creatures, that includes leviathan, frolicking in the waters.

Psalms 104:24-26 NIV
[24] How many are your works, Lord! In wisdom you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures. [25] There is the sea, vast and spacious, teeming with creatures beyond number— living things both large and small. [26] There the ships go to and fro, and Leviathan, which you formed to frolic there.


What do you make of these differences in how these entities are presented? Leviathan and behemoth.

 

[Job 33:6]

Or we could think about something simple like grace through faith and not by works. Or the value of animal sacrifice.

Imagine reading the following passage:

Hebrews 10:4 NIV
[4] It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

Leviticus 17:11 NIV
[11] For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.

If you read the new testament first, and then backtrack into Leviticus, It wouldn't make any sense. You'd end up with a Bible contradiction.

So you have to read the Bible from the start and forward so that you don't end up with these contradictions.

It's important to understand how the two relate to one another. But you still have to read it from the start and then forward, in order for it to make sense.

Eye for an eye:

Old Testament View:
The Law allowed for proportional justice (Exodus 21:24: "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth."). This principle, known as lex talionis, was designed to limit vengeance.

New Testament View:
Jesus teaches in Matthew 5:38-39: "You have heard it was said, 'Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person."

Gods dwelling place:

Old Testament View:
God’s presence dwelt in the temple (1 Kings 8:10-11: "The glory of the Lord filled the temple.").

New Testament View:
Jesus declares in John 4:21: "A time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem." Paul later says in 1 Corinthians 6:19: "Your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit."

@David Lamb we could come up with lots and lots of examples where, the old testament and the new testament, they make sense when you read them together, but you still have to read it from the start to the finish. You can't read it backwards, or you would end up with some sort of reverse revelation where the old testament was never meaningful in its own context.

Or here is a fun one:

The Divine Council


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made." John 1:1-3

Genesis 1:26 NIV
[26] Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image,

New testament view:
Many people would say here that God is basically talking to himself as the Trinity, alongside the holy Spirit and Jesus, in the creation of mankind. Because John 1 says that Jesus was present in the beginning.

But what about just a few chapters later?

Genesis 11:3-7 NIV
[3] They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. [4] Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” [5] But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. [6] The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. [7] Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

Come, let us go down and confuse their language.

So Jesus is confusing people's languages now?

Other passages identify the "us" with angels, such as this one:

Old Testament view:
Isaiah 6:1-3, 8 NIV
[1] In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord, high and exalted, seated on a throne; and the train of his robe filled the temple. [2] Above him were seraphim, each with six wings: With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying. [3] And they were calling to one another: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory.”
[8] Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

And so, you don't want to read the new testament backwards into the old testament without first understanding the original old testament context. In its original context of the old testament, these passages were about a divine council, they weren't about Jesus because Jesus hadn't been born yet and Moses and the isrealites didn't know who Jesus was yet.

@David Lamb

 

[Job 33:6]

To summarize my last post:
The Bible has multiple layers of meaning, you have your Old Testament context, your historical context in a sense, and then you have your new testament context.

And it's true that you can read the Old Testament in light of Jesus, in that the Old Testament presents prophecy of the one who is to come.

But proper Bible reading still requires that someone distinguishes between Old Testament context and New Testament context. And it's an error to read the New Testament context, and then to assume that the Old Testament says the same thing as the new.

Here is one more example:

Psalm 68:18 (OT Context):
"You ascended on high, leading a host of captives in your train and receiving gifts among men, even among the rebellious, that the Lord God may dwell there."

This verse celebrates God's victory and kingship. It refers to God triumphantly ascending Mount Zion, leading captives (symbolizing His enemies), and receiving tribute or gifts from conquered peoples.

Ephesians 4:8 (NT Context):
"Therefore it says, 'When he ascended on high, he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.'"

Paul applies this verse to Christ's ascension, but he notably changes "receiving gifts" to "gave gifts," reflecting Jesus distributing spiritual gifts to His followers after His victory over sin and death.

OT: God’s victory as a divine warrior.

NT: Christ’s victory over sin, with the imagery reinterpreted to emphasize Jesus’ distribution of spiritual gifts.

The passages read the same, or similarly. Paul is quoting Psalm 68. Paul is referencing and speaking about a revelation, or he is sharing a revelation associated with Psalm 68, but what Paul is saying isn't actually the same thing.

We can't read Ephesians 4 and then assume that Psalm 68 is talking about Jesus giving gifts.

That's not a correct reading of the old testament.

And that's what we get in Genesis and Colossians. We can't say that Colossians describes ex nihilo creation, therefore that's what Genesis must mean.

Because they aren't the same context.

@David Lamb

 

[roman2819]

The twenty-four hour day is only created on the fourth 'day'. Each of the 6 'days' of creation is not literal, but instead, the word 'day' refers to a stage or phase or passage of time.

The Bible gives a brief summary of how the twenty-four hour day was created on the fourth day (or stage). As God planned to set lights in the sky [Genesis 1:14-15], He “made two great lights—the greater light (sun) to govern the day and the lesser light (moon) to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness" [Genesis 1:16-17].

As He went on to “set them (the sun, moon and stars) in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness” [Genesis 1:18], God constructed the day and night as we know it. For the first time in the creation process, the day and night as we know were formed – which is different from the day and night on the first day of creation, when the sun, moon and stars were not yet in place. Our definition of a twenty-four hour day was made on the fourth stage. It means the other same word, day (1 to 6) is not literally 24-hours. When reading the Scriptures, don't just see the words literally, figure out the context.

Genesis 1:14-18 describe how God made the 24-hour day on the 4th day (the 4th stage of the creation process). I don't see how it can be clearer than that.

-- Adapted from 'Understanding Prayer, Faith and God's will: Compass for Christian Faith"

 

[davetaff]

Hi
The first day of this creation began when Noah stepped of the ark it would take 6 days to complete each day would be 1000 years long the end of creation would be mankind in the image of God which is the body of Christ which hevwill present to the Father on his return

Love and Peace
Dave