- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
01 Oct 13
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsIn Genesis 2:4 it says - "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day Jehovah God made earth and heaven"
Starlight And A Young Earth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xdlmykLI58
The Instructor
Focus on the phrase "in the day Jehovah God made earth and heaven".
Which day was that ? We just read about seven days - 1:5,8,13,19,23,31,2:2.
Which of these days is referred to as "THE DAY Jehovah God made earth and heaven" ?
01 Oct 13
A homosexual dies and finds himself before the gates of Heaven and St. Peter, who says, "Come on in man!" Confused, the gay dude questions, "But I thought I would be going to Hell for all of the bad things I did." St. Peter replies, "Oh, relax, we don't keep records here, it's too much work!" The homosexual goes in, and is once again surprised to see tons of beautiful girls whipping themselves and crying. He asks St. Peter, "Why are they doing that?" St. Peter answers, "Ah, those are all of our virgins. They just found out we don't keep records about who boinks who and how much."
01 Oct 13
Originally posted by sonshipIf "in the day" means a specific day, then it must mean the first day mentioned in Genesis 1:5. If it is referring to "in the day" in general, then it would mean the time period that it took place.
In Genesis 2:4 it says - "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day Jehovah God made earth and heaven"
Focus on the phrase [b]"in the day Jehovah God made earth and heaven".
Which day was that ? We just read about seven days - 1:5,8,13,19,23,31,2:2.
Which of these days is referred to as "THE DAY Jehovah God made earth and heaven" ? [/b]
The Instructor
01 Oct 13
Originally posted by RJHindsThe Bible is long and the bit about the earth being formed is very short indeed. Also people go on holiday to the desert to see stars, you can see the milky way in the desert and other religions are based on these stars. in short I don't think the bible was out to explain them .... there's my stupid thoughts on the issue 😏
If "in the day" means a specific day, then it must mean the first day mentioned in Genesis 1:5. If it is referring to "in the day" in general, then it would mean the time period that it took place.
The Instructor
01 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by e4chrisI agree. It was only meant to give a general understanding to guide us in the right direction. That is all I can hope to do too by giving my opinion on the subject.
The Bible is long and the bit about the earth being formed is very short indeed. Also people go on holiday to the desert to see stars, you can see the milky way in the desert and other religions are based on these stars. in short I don't think the bible was out to explain them .... there's my stupid thoughts on the issue 😏
The Instructor
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
01 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsI favor your second possible explanation -
If "in the day" means a specific day, then it must mean the first day mentioned in Genesis 1:5. If it is referring to "in the day" in general, then it would mean the time period that it took place.
The Instructor
If it is referring to "in the day" in general, then it would mean the time period that it took place.
I think the more general meaning of yom must be meant.
Thankyou. Indulge me on another question please.
I take it that you believe that Genesis 6:17 means a flood which covered the entire planet -
"And now I am about to bring a flood of water upon the earth to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die."
Genesis 2:5 says "And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, ...".
Does this mean to you that no plant was yet in the whole planet until after God formed man in verse 7 of chapter two ?
How do you reconcile that the plants were in the earth on day three in Genesis 1:11 before man was created on day six (Gen. 1:26) ?
02 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipI can only give you my opinion because I don't know for certain. I think Genesis 2-25 is only giving more detail in relation to human creation.
I favor your second possible explanation -
If it is referring to "in the day" in general, then it would mean the time period that it took place.
I think the more general meaning of yom must be meant.
Thankyou. Indulge me on another question please.
I take it that you believe that [b]Genesis 6:17 means a flood ...[text shortened]... earth on day three in Genesis 1:11 before man was created on day six (Gen. 1:26) ?[/b]
God obviously intends for man to learn how to cultivate the earth and planted a garden for this purpose. So I believe Genesis 2:5 is referring to that field where the garden was planted and not to the whole earth as a planet.
The Instructor
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 Oct 13
I can only give you my opinion because I don't know for certain. I think Genesis 2-25 is only giving more detail in relation to human creation.
God obviously intends for man to learn how to cultivate the earth and planted a garden for this purpose. So I believe Genesis 2:5 is referring to that field where the garden was planted and not to the whole earth as a planet.
So "earth" in chapter two could be local but "earth" in chapter six has to be the entire planet ?
03 Oct 13
Originally posted by sonshipNo, that is not what I am saying. It will depend on which word is translated earth and the context to determine what is meant. So you have to put this all together to get the correct meaning.
[quote] I can only give you my opinion because I don't know for certain. I think Genesis 2-25 is only giving more detail in relation to human creation.
God obviously intends for man to learn how to cultivate the earth and planted a garden for this purpose. So I believe Genesis 2:5 is referring to that field where the garden was planted and not to the whol ...[text shortened]... b] in chapter two could be local but [b]"earth" in chapter six has to be the entire planet ?[/b]
In both places there are two different words translated earth and there are other words translated ground, land, and field. I believe the context of Genesis 2:5 and immediately following is basically referring to a particular plot of land or a field of land on the earth that was localized in Eden where God planted this garden especially for man. Certainly this does not mean that there were not other fields of land over the surface of the earth where there were shrubs and vegetation growing from day 3 of creation.
In Chapter 6 there is another word translated earth that I believe refers to the land or ground that was being inhabited by man at that time. However, when it comes to the flood, the same word for the created earth of Genesis 1 is used and the context indicates the waters covered all of it.
The Instructor
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
03 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsI should have checked the words.
No, that is not what I am saying. It will depend on which word is translated earth and the context to determine what is meant. So you have to put this all together to get the correct meaning.
In both places there are two different words translated earth and there are other words translated ground, land, and field. I believe the context of Genesis 2:5 a ...[text shortened]... h of Genesis 1 is used and the context indicates the waters covered all of it.
The Instructor
But you have Strong's Concordance # 776 for earth in Genesis 1:1.
God created the heavens and the EARTH.
You also have the same word # 776 in Genesis 2:5 - " ... of the field before it was in the EARTH ... had not caused it to rain upon the EARTH ..."
The same word is used in verse 6 - "there went up a mist from the EARTH"
You have a all-inclusive use of the word in Genesis 2:1 - "the heavens and the EARTH were finished ..."
The heavens and the EARTH were finished ... and before any seed was in the EARTH. Can you see that someone could argue that no seed in the earth could be no seed in the soil of the planet anywhere ?
I do not say I argue that way. But just based on the word used, I could see someone saying that there was a irreconcilable contradiction between chapter one and chapter two.
I have been studying the Bible for many years. At this point in my life I think I would believe that the discrepancy might even be purposeful. The contradiction may be sovereign of God to frustrate us from a certain kind of "missing the point" we are prone to do.
But I could be wrong. Genesis one and two cannot be imagined to be ab exhaustive account of how God created everything. Obviously, if that was what He meant then probably there would be 60 books just to describe what SOIL is or what WATER is or what a PLANT is, etc.
Anyway, there is grounds to see earth from which the mist rose up is not local but as much all-inclusive as EARTH that was finished in Genesis 2:1.
You do have a different word in chapter 6 for verse 7. My RcV has "ground" there instead of earth. I think KJV has earth. It is entry 127.
And it reads - "And Jehovah said, I will blot out the man whom I have created from the surface of the ground [earth (KJV) ]
Did I refer to Gen. 6:7 ? Maybe I should have referred to verse 14 - "I will destroy them with the EARTH" .
There you have EARTH # 776 as in Genesis 2:5 .
You know you (and me too) have to be careful before you make these kinds of arguments, especially too conclusively.
Destroy all the EARTH.
A mist went up from the EARTH.
Same word in Hebrew.
Anyway, I keep my ears open.
I listen to some of the things said YECs propose - selectively.
03 Oct 13
Originally posted by ZahlanziI had to give ya a thumbs up on that shlongski !!!
A homosexual dies and finds himself before the gates of Heaven and St. Peter, who says, "Come on in man!" Confused, the gay dude questions, "But I thought I would be going to Hell for all of the bad things I did." St. Peter replies, "Oh, relax, we don't keep records here, it's too much work!" The homosexual goes in, and is once again surprised to see tons o ...[text shortened]... ll of our virgins. They just found out we don't keep records about who boinks who and how much."
03 Oct 13
Originally posted by sonshipAtheists are always pointing out these kind of so-called contradictions all the time. Even if the same exact word is used, one must get its meaning in each case from the context. If one misunderstands the context, then that one is likely to get the wrong meaning of a word or so.
I should have checked the words.
But you have Strong's Concordance # 776 for [b]earth in Genesis 1:1.
God created the heavens and the EARTH.
You also have the same word # 776 in Genesis 2:5 - " ... of the field before it was in the EARTH ... had not caused it to rain upon the EARTH ..."
The same word is used in verse 6 - "there ...[text shortened]...
Anyway, I keep my ears open.
I listen to some of the things said YECs propose - selectively.
I can only give you my opinion, based on my understanding of the context. If you think it means something different, then that is up to you.
The Instructor
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
03 Oct 13
Atheists are always pointing out these kind of so-called contradictions all the time.
There is a logical fallacy if you say because Atheists do something and a Christian does the same - the Christian is an Atheist or is even acting with the same motive.
Read Paul's epistles carefully and you will see that he too deal with paradoxes and scriptural contradictions in a sober and logical way.
Even if the same exact word is used, one must get its meaning in each case from the context.
That's right. So some fighting that earth has to mean the entire planet was covered have to consider this aspect of interpreting context. Maybe they should not be too dogmatic to insist on a view which could may not be right.
If one misunderstands the context, then that one is likely to get the wrong meaning of a word or so.
I can only give you my opinion, based on my understanding of the context. If you think it means something different, then that is up to you.
Thanks for giving me your opinion.
Praise the Lord for His word.