Before the beginning there was only God.
The question is whether Genesis 1:1, and the week that ensued - the question is whether or not this is THE beginning which is spoken of throughout the Scripture. Is the beginning of Genesis One, and the whole chapter - is that beginning the time frame of the creation of Adam?
Is this the same "Beginning" that is mentioned quite a few times throughout Scripture?
Or is there another beginning? I think not. Can anyone provide scriptural support for the notion of some other, earlier beginning than THE beginning that is referenced by Jesus?
If Genesis chapter Five does not tell us WHEN the beginning was, then what is the reason for all the years and capacity for simple math to lead us to the precise date of the Flood AM?

Views: 1560

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

So you assume that since God is eternal there must be at least two eternal things including the place where God exists. Do you also assume that this place had a floor so that God was not floating around for all eternity? If you do then you believe in three eternal things including a floor to stand on. Do you also assume God had a throne to sit on so God was not standing around for all eternity? Then you believe in four eternal things including a throne to sit on. Do you assume four eternally existing things Aaron?

 

These are serious questions. I would appreciate your answer to them.


 
Aaron Lewis said:

 

 

My assumption is that God exists.  In that God is eternal.

 

Since God exists He has to exist in existence somewhere.

 

The only other alternative is that everything that exists other than God exists inside of God.

 

God Bless,

Hi Charles,

 

I am sorry that you are a bit confused but then so are a lot of people.  There are many things I am confused on also.

 

But when it comes to the Bible text I am a literalist.

 

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

So literally that says that the heavens and the earth was created in a day.  That would be composed of a light period or of a light period and a period of darkness.   Light period = day,  light period + dark period = day.

 

Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

That literally says darkness existed.

Yet the earth already existed because it is described as being empty and void of life.

 

So what day was the heavens and the earth created in?  In other words what day did the heavens and earth begin to exist?

 

The heavens and the earth existed in Genesis 1:2, That is a fact.

Darkness existed at Genesis 1:2.  That is a fact.

The heavens and the earth was created in a day.  That is a fact. Genesis 1:1, 2:4.

 

Since darkness existed at Genesis 1:2 the only conclusion I can draw is that there was a light period in which the heavens and the earth began to exist that closed with the darkness of Genesis 1:2 and "DAY ONE" ended with the light period of the morning of the second day as stated in the Bible.

 

God's definition of day:

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

 

God called the light Day.

God called the darkness Night.

God called the evening which is the end of a light period, and the morning which is the end of a dark period "DAY ONE"

 

The Hebrew cardinal number אחד (ahd) which means one was used in the original text and not the ordinal number ראשון (rashon) which means first in the text of Genesis 1:5.

 

The text of the generations of the heavens and the earth in the day they were created require that there was a light period in existence as life forms existed in that history.

 

In answer to your questions concerning life forms on earth.

 

Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

 

This man was formed from the dust of the ground and became a living being before any plants or animals existed on earth, according to the text.

 

Therefore I can take what man says or what the Bible says.

 

God Bless,

 

Aaron

 

 

Charles Jones said:

I'm a bit confused. Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you. 

"God also called the light period and the following dark period as DAY."

Again, isn't it the other way around?

"The earth existed prior to Genesis 1:2. Now when was the earth 'bra' (ברא) created? We know it was prior to the darkness found in Genesis 1:2."

Yes, the earth was created in Genesis 1:1. How do we know the darkness was not created with the earth in Gen 1:1? We are not told it was created in Gen 1:2, but as you worded it, it is found in verse 2. Verse 2 is only the first time we hear about it.

"DAY one ended with the morning of the light period following the dark period of Genesis 1:2."

You state here Day 1 ended with a light period following a dark period. I agree. But you have been saying a day is light followed by darkness. Are you saying here that the first day was light, then dark, then light?

"There are many things in the history/generations that took place in the DAY the earth was created.  They are found following Genesis 2:4 as all the generations/history of families in the Bible follow the verse saying, "These are the generations of (insert name)"."

Where does the Bible say that the generations of any human or living earthly thing took place on the day the earth was created (Day 1)? The first thing to be created that we consider life (plants) was created on Day 3. Humans were not created until Day 5.



Aaron Lewis said:

Hi Charles,



Charles Jones said:

Aaron,

I can't speak for Jim, but why couldn't darkness have been created in Genesis 1:1 with the heavens and the earth? It seems the earth was created with darkness on the face of the deep in verse 1, and is described in verse 2. The same can be said about the deep itself and the waters, so I see no problem with darkness preceding light.

 

Do you believe the Bible?

 

If you do, you will have to go with light existing before darkness.

 

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

 

The heavens and the earth began to exist in Genesis 1:1.

God defines DAY as a light period as He called the light DAY.  God also called the light period and the following dark period as DAY.

 

Observation from Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

 

The earth existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

 

Now when was the earth 'bra' (ברא) created?

We know it was prior to the darkness found in Genesis 1:2.

 

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

 

This verse says that the earth was created in a light period or a light period and a dark period.  Since it existed at the dark period found in Genesis 1:2 Genesis 1:1 had to take place in a light period according to God's definition of a DAY.

 

DAY one ended with the morning of the light period following the dark period of Genesis 1:2.

 

There are many things in the history/generations that took place in the DAY the earth was created.  They are found following Genesis 2:4 as all the generations/history of families in the Bible follow the verse saying, "These are the generations of (insert name)".

 

God Bless,

You said it... but wait, since you're a man all that you've said is what man says.



Aaron Lewis said:

 

 

Since darkness existed at Genesis 1:2 the only conclusion I can draw is that there was a light period in which the heavens and the earth began to exist that closed with the darkness of Genesis 1:2 and "DAY ONE" ended with the light period of the morning of the second day as stated in the Bible.

 

 

Therefore I can take what man says or what the Bible says.

 

God Bless,

 

Aaron

Hi Aaron, 

My text is in bold since I can't figure out how to work this the way I want it.

Aaron Lewis said:

But when it comes to the Bible text I am a literalist.

Really, being literal isn't always right. Here is a quote from Dr. Jason Lisle's blog that seems to address you pretty well.

"...but in fact we do not take the Bible literally, but literarily. We take history as literal of course, because that’s what history is. But we recognize that the Bible contains poetic sections, like the Psalms, and uses occasional figures of speech even in historical narrative."

This would apply to God being referred to as light and us being referred to as salt and light. These are symbolic, poetic figures of speech, not literal statements.

God called the evening which is the end of a light period, and the morning which is the end of a dark period "DAY ONE"

Why must evening automatically be the end of a light period? That is how our society uses "evening", but it seems that in this text and Jewish life (I am not an expert, just my understanding) that "evening" is simply a dark period. A day is a dark period followed by a light period.

In answer to your questions concerning life forms on earth.

Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This man was formed from the dust of the ground and became a living being before any plants or animals existed on earth, according to the text.

No. This is not at all what it means. The qualifying term "of the field" means "cultivated." That does not mean plants did not exist prior to man, it means cultivated plants did not exist because there was no man to cultivate them. This passage is a closer reference to Day 6 and not any time prior. Even ignoring this, I don't see how you have any basis for saying man came before "any" animals on earth.

Hi Alexander,

Alexander Martin said:

You said it... but wait, since you're a man all that you've said is what man says.

Give the man a cigar, as that is a correct statement.

 

What I have said or written is my words of conclusions I have come too with schooling I have received and then 40+ years of studying what the scholars have put forth as their conclusions.

 

The texts I have presented is not my words as they are the words presented in the Hebrew text and KJV text.

 

You have every right to question anything I say or write.  That is what debate is all about.  I present my understanding of a text and then you can refute my understanding of the text with your argumentation or you can do as most and attack the person presenting their understanding of what the text says.

 

I can only learn when my understanding is refuted by references, definitions of Hebrew words, and usages of those words.

Someone just stating I disagree with what they believe, or I don't know what I am talking about is no more than the wind blowing. 

 

Each and every person posting in this thread have presented their words.

God Bless,

Aaron



Aaron Lewis said:

Since darkness existed at Genesis 1:2 the only conclusion I can draw is that there was a light period in which the heavens and the earth began to exist that closed with the darkness of Genesis 1:2 and "DAY ONE" ended with the light period of the morning of the second day as stated in the Bible.

Therefore I can take what man says or what the Bible says.

God Bless,

Aaron

Hi Charles,

 

My words will not be bolded but will not be indented.

Charles Jones said:

Hi Aaron, 

My text is in bold since I can't figure out how to work this the way I want it.

Aaron Lewis said:

But when it comes to the Bible text I am a literalist.

Really, being literal isn't always right. Here is a quote from Dr. Jason Lisle's blog that seems to address you pretty well.

"...but in fact we do not take the Bible literally, but literarily. We take history as literal of course, because that’s what history is. But we recognize that the Bible contains poetic sections, like the Psalms, and uses occasional figures of speech even in historical narrative."

Is Genesis chapter 1 and 2 history?

Is Genesis chapter 1 and 2 poetic, prophecy or figures of speech?

This would apply to God being referred to as light and us being referred to as salt and light. These are symbolic, poetic figures of speech, not literal statements.

Do you have a reason why God told Moses:

Exodus 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.?

Or why Moses had to cover his face with a vail as his face shone when he came down from the mount in Exodus 34:29-35?

What would cause Moses face to shine so bright that it had to be covered from the people, other than being in the presence of a bright light? 

God called the evening which is the end of a light period, and the morning which is the end of a dark period "DAY ONE"

Why must evening automatically be the end of a light period? That is how our society uses "evening", but it seems that in this text and Jewish life (I am not an expert, just my understanding) that "evening" is simply a dark period. A day is a dark period followed by a light period.

Evening does not begin a light period.  Morning begins a light period.

To have an evening you have to have a morning.

In answer to your questions concerning life forms on earth.

Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This man was formed from the dust of the ground and became a living being before any plants or animals existed on earth, according to the text.

No. This is not at all what it means. The qualifying term "of the field" means "cultivated." That does not mean plants did not exist prior to man, it means cultivated plants did not exist because there was no man to cultivate them. This passage is a closer reference to Day 6 and not any time prior. Even ignoring this, I don't see how you have any basis for saying man came before "any" animals on earth.

 

I am sure you believe that is what the text says as that is what you have been told it means.  I studied Hebrew 6 years so I would not have to accept what man says but could compare what man says to what is written in the text and draw my own conclusions.

Where does the Hebrew text refer to cultivated?

We are back to the Hebrew word transliterated hyh (the one used when God said "I AM THAT I AM") which tells me that the plants did not exist period.  Genesis 2:5

They did not begin to exist until God planted them in Genesis 1:8.

How can anything In Genesis 2:4-25 have anything to do with day six as it is declared in Genesis 2:4 to have taken place in the day the Lord God created the heavens and the earth.

I need argumentation not an assertion.

 

I did not say that man came before "any" animals on earth. The text says that and I just agreed with the text.

 

The text of Genesis 2:7 states that God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into him the breath of life and he became a living being (soul).

Then God planted a Garden. Genesis 2:8

Then God put the man He had formed from the dust of the ground and put him in the garden to dress and keep it. Genesis 2:15

God then gave the man a command telling him he could eat of all the fruit of the trees of the garden except the 1 tree in the middle of the garden. Genesis 2:16, 17

Then God formed every beast of the field and fowl of the air out of the ground. Genesis 2:19

After all these things God took a rib from the man and formed what the man called woman who he accepted as being bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh to be one with him. Genesis 2:21-23

 

So the text is what is saying that man was formed from the dust of the earth placing that event prior to any other event of any living entity existing.

 

I am simply agreeing with the text.

 

Please notice that none of these life forms were said to be (bra) created.  God formed them from existing material. The man received the breath of life which was not said about the other animals brought to the man to name.

 

God Bless,

 

Aaron

 

 

Hi Alexander,
 
Alexander Martin said:

So you assume that since God is eternal there must be at least two eternal things including the place where God exists.

There is either existence or nonexistence.  There is no third alternative that anyone has ever presented.

God exists in the third heaven as Paul talks about or either Paul had no clue as to what he was talking about.

If God is all existence as some have claimed then everything that exists, exists inside of God.  My question then would be how could Moses look on the back parts of God if he existed inside of God? Exodus 33:23

Do you also assume that this place had a floor so that God was not floating around for all eternity?

I assume there is a place where the third heaven and the universe and the heavens we know exist.  Our present heavens and earth will melt with fervent heat and cease to exist and will be replaced by a New Heaven and a New Earth in the future.  But no place do I find where the third heaven ceases to exist as that is where the New Jerusalem John saw in Revelation descends to earth from.

If you do then you believe in three eternal things including a floor to stand on. Do you also assume God had a throne to sit on so God was not standing around for all eternity? Then you believe in four eternal things including a throne to sit on. Do you assume four eternally existing things Aaron?

I have no reason to not believe that there is a place where the third heaven exists along with our present heavens and earth exist.

I have no reason to not believe in the third heaven Paul mentioned in 2 Cor. 12:2

I have no reason to not believe that God the Father sits on a throne (Revelation 7:15) with God the Son (Mark 16:19) at His side.

The Greek word θρόνος transliterated 'thronos' in Rev. 7:15 means seat

These are serious questions. I would appreciate your answer to them.

In the grand scope of thing they are not that serious as they have absolutely nothing to do with where a person spends eternity.

But yes to help us grow they are great questions.

 

Do you have any argumentation to support why I should not believe what the Bible text says concerning the third heaven and God sitting on a throne with Jesus at His right side? 

 

If so please present it.

 

God Bless,

 

Aaron



Aaron Lewis said:

My assumption is that God exists.  In that God is eternal.

Since God exists He has to exist in existence somewhere.

The only other alternative is that everything that exists other than God exists inside of God.

God Bless,



Aaron Lewis said:


Do you have any argumentation to support why I should not believe what the Bible text says concerning the third heaven and God sitting on a throne with Jesus at His right side? 

Of course not. And you can provide no argumentation to support your notions of God in eternity, before this present manifestation of Himself to the World that He created, including the heavens which He also created. We all believe what the text of Scripture declares. We just do not accept your imaginative interpretations of the Scripture.

Do you believe that Jesus is God?

Hi Jim,

Jim Brenneman said:

Aaron Lewis said:

So Jesus is roaming around the universe while seated at the right hand of God the Father making intercession for the sins of mankind and the angels are worshiping God.
Jim I don't think I made that statement.  I believe that was made by Alexander and was later misquoted.
Here again we see Aaron holding to a god who is like man, to a god that he has imagined to have a form and nature that is like unto created things, the mistake in thinking that Paul warns against as the habit of those who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.
Jim do you not believe that Jesus was 100% God and 100% man?
If not 100% man how was He tempted like we are?
If not 100% God how was He able to pay the sin debt of mankind?
God is Spirit.
Yes.
And the Holy Spirit is the one in the earth that convicts mankind he/she is a sinner and needs to be saved.
The Holy Spirit is also the one who is supposed to lead us in all truth, not some organization or man.
Jesus is in all the universe, upholding all things by the word of His power.
I believe that everything consists because of Jesus as stated in Col. 1:17.  I do not believe He has to be active in that process today as He placed certain laws into effect that does the job not requiring His attention.
He is Omnipotent. He is Omniscient and His eyes run to and fro throughout the whole universe to show himself strong on the behalf of those whose hearts are perfect toward Him. He is Omnipresent as well, and wherever two or three are gathered together in His name, there He is in the midst of them.
Is the God/man, God the son, that died on the cross to redeem mankind from condemnation presently in that glorified physical body that we will be like when He returns doing the things you mentioned above.
 
OR is God the Holy Spirit whom He sent on the day of Pentecost the one doing the things you mentioned.
 
According to what I get from your statement you do not believe in a triune God.
 
Do you believe that God exists and has 3 different manifestations, presented in the Bible as God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit?
This absolute rule of God over all that He has created is what it means for Him to be enthroned on high. Yes He does appear on a throne, at the right hand of the Father, but the heaven of heavens cannot contain Him!
Which heaven is that talking about that can not contain Him?
Aaron said:

You are the one claiming to believe the Bible and telling me I do not believe the Bible.

No, my fine friend. You are the one who is always asking whether or not we believe in the Bible. I merely quoted your own words. I have not said that you "do not believe" the Bible. I have however said that you misread it and apply rules of grammar selectively and you pick and choose when you will limit the meaning and usage of particular words of Hebrew vocabulary.

I do not limit the meaning of particular words of the Hebrew vocabulary.  I use the definition of the lexicons to find out what a particular word means. Just like I look up English words in a dictionary to get their latest definitions.

You certainly do not concur with our statement of faith here at creation conversations, and you a self-avowed opponent of mainstream creationism.

Am I supposed to believe everything that you or those at creation conversations believe?

Is what you believe infallible?

 

As I have said throughout the thread if you disagree with the text and my presentation of them then all you have to do is to present your rebuttal.  Assertions of what you believe or what someone else believes is not a rebuttal.

 

If you disagree that the heavens and the earth existed in Genesis 1:1 and was a completed product present your argumentation.

 

If you disagree that a disjunctive conjunction exists between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 present your argumentation.  The Jewish scholars who translated the LXX used a disjunctive conjunction. The Masoretic text is marked with a disjunctive conjunction.

 

If you disagree that God called the light day and a combination of the light that ended with evening and the darkness that ended with the light of the following day in Genesis 1:5 "DAY ONE" present your argumentation.

 

I will stop with these for now.

 

God Bless,

 

Aaron

Good plan. Just stop. You keep challenging us to defend things that we already believe in. But you refuse to support you imaginations about God from Scripture. So stopping would be a good plan. You have no basis in OUR Scripture to say that God IS like man, or that from Eternity God was like man.

Aaron,

I, unlike you, have not had the opportunity to study Hebrew. That being the case, I will post the information that has helped my understanding of the passage, and I encourage all of the members here at CC that are well-versed in Hebrew to give input and help me to have the correct understanding or reaffirm if this understanding is correct. I also am curious to know what your explanation is for the orders in Gen1 compared to Gen2 if your understanding were the case.

"The Hebrew word here is sadeh, and where it is used of known geographic locations, refers to either a quite limited area of land, and/or a flat place suitable for agriculture, as opposed to the word used in 1:11, "earth", which is 'erets -- a word which has much broader geographic connotations. 

A key to understanding what is being described here is that verse 2:5 goes on to explain WHY there were no "plants of the field" -- because a) there was no rain upon the earth, and b) there was no man to work the earth -- the two key elements for agriculture according to the ancient mindset. Thus, what this passage indicates is that there was as yet no organized agriculture, and that makes sense of the verses following, where God specifically plants the garden of Eden and places man to tend to it. G2 is not indicating that there were no plants created yet at all, but that a special place was set aside for the foundation of agriculture and for plants "of the field" to be developed."

The explanation of the animals in the Garden is much longer, so I will simply post the link. The animals are addressed a little down the page. http://www.tektonics.org/jedp/creationtwo.html

Charles I think you hit the nail on the head...  Certainly if GOd created all animal diversity before man, then plants and other necessary requirements of the eco-niches had to exist for them to move forward.  However this seems a very specific piece of land in a certain area, and even the rain here does not imply the earth had "never" had rain, it just hadn't rained where God was going to plant this garden and set man in to till the soil.  This seems for the plain english very clear.  But then what do I know? 

Reply to Discussion

RSS

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms
FAQ

Homeschool Curriculum

Members

Creation Conversations 2018

What's new @ CC for 2018? 

Creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2018   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service