Creation Account

[MrsSealedEternal]

The problem is Daniel did not even know the weeks were weeks of years at the time. A yowm or yome does not mean 24 hours either. It can, but it does not have to.

Agreed, but I do not see any indication to reason it stands for millions or billions of years when referred to by God as evening and morning, one day.

I will explain to you my take on it. The evening and the morning were the first day. Evening of what? Morning of what? I understand the whole Hebrew day thing about how their days begin in the evening, but I do not think that is why the creation account is worded that way.

Day 1 began with evening and ended with morning. It began with the evening (or ending) of the state of chaos, or non order that had been present in the universe. It ended with the morning (or beginning) of day 2. This pattern continues through day six. Day six ended with the morning (or beginning) of day 7. On day 7 God rested. We are still in day 7. God is still resting from His creative action. He is no longer Creating. He has rested from creating. He will re-create the Earth a final time after Jesus final defeat of Satan, but at the present He is resting from His creative role.

Well I do think this and what if your application here is wrong? I think it is quite possibly so, in fact, likely.

If this Genesis account has a prophetic understanding to it that we have not yet fully grasped that does deal with the dimension of time we live under, then the implications of a misapplication like that can be very misleading. Just like Daniel's weeks had a signifigant understanding that made perfect sense when applied properly. Weeks=7. 7 what??? was the key to making sense of it all. One day=24hrs=thousand years is what I have established so far concerning its applications to time.

[nebula]

So why is "day" 24-hours in Gen. 1, but not when God said, "The day you eat...you will die."

(Again, the face-value interpretation is "you will drop dead in within the 24-hour period you eat of it.")

Why is Gen. 1 face-value but not this verse?

The fact is Adam DID die in the moment that he sinned. He was separated from God immediately. He also died in the day (physically) that he ate because God transcends time. God sees time from a different perspective. A day(24 hrs) is AS A THOUSAND YEARS, and a thousand years is AS A DAY. Jesus has only been away for 2 days the way god sees it, but he has been workig on our heavenly home for 2000 years. Not just the 6 days that it took Him to create the heavens and the earth and all that is in them.

Ex 20:11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

LT

Am I the only person who sees the differences here?

Gen. 1 is popularly translated point blank, yet the translation of "the day you eat of it you shall surely die" is manipulated to fit the data. Why is it OK to do this with the one but not the other?

[MrsSealedEternal]

So why is "day" 24-hours in Gen. 1, but not when God said, "The day you eat...you will die."

(Again, the face-value interpretation is "you will drop dead in within the 24-hour period you eat of it.")

Why is Gen. 1 face-value but not this verse?

The fact is Adam DID die in the moment that he sinned. He was separated from God immediately. He also died in the day (physically) that he ate because God transcends time. God sees time from a different perspective. A day(24 hrs) is AS A THOUSAND YEARS, and a thousand years is AS A DAY. Jesus has only been away for 2 days the way god sees it, but he has been workig on our heavenly home for 2000 years. Not just the 6 days that it took Him to create the heavens and the earth and all that is in them.

Ex 20:11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

LT

Am I the only person who sees the differences here?

Gen. 1 is popularly translated point blank, yet the translation of "the day you eat of it you shall surely die" is manipulated to fit the data. Why is it OK to do this with the one but not the other?

You are reminding of Margaret.

Okay Neb, here I go again...

He says evening and morning, one day and so on for all the creative days. Therefore, in reference to time, on face value, this is indicative of a 24 hr time perameter.

"in the day you eat of it you shall surely die" is not being minipulated to fit the data. It does fit the data. He died that day spiritually, and if the Hebraic reading of it does expess 'in dying you will die', than that verse is true in that sense. Besides that, because day=24hrs=1,000yrs, it would be doubly true. He lived to be 930 years old, so he did surely die the day he ate of it.

[nebula]

Then can you acknowledge that according to the literal translation:

1 In the beginning of God's preparing the heavens and the earth -- 2 the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,

3 and God saith, `Let light be;' and light is. 4 And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness, 5 and God calleth to the light `Day,' and to the darkness He hath called `Night;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day one.

6 And God saith, `Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.' 7 And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the expanse, and the waters which [are] above the expanse: and it is so. 8 And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second. . . .

That the earth existed long before God said, "Let there be light"?

That God did not create light in vs. 3, but maybe called it forth?

That it never says when God created the waters, only that He separated them?

So you see, by the literal translation, vs. 2 clearly indicates the pre-existance of the earth for an indisclosed length of time.

And notice vs 5:

God calls the light, "Day" - with evening being the end of "Day" - and the darkness, "Night" - with morning being the end of "Night."

It makes a lot more poetic/prophetic sense to me than a scientific one! We all know that a day does not last from evening to morning. But, in th epoetic/prophetic sense, we see:

"and there is an evening, and there is a morning" =

"and there is an [end of 'Day,'] and there is an [end of 'Night'] =

"and there is an [end to ligseparation from light to darkness], and an [separation from darkness to light]

You see - if you stop trying to look at Genesis 1 scientifically and start reading it theologically - isn't it a lot cooler?!

[Floatingaxe]

Then can you acknowledge that according to the literal translation:

1 In the beginning of God's preparing the heavens and the earth -- 2 the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,

3 and God saith, `Let light be;' and light is. 4 And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness, 5 and God calleth to the light `Day,' and to the darkness He hath called `Night;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day one.

6 And God saith, `Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.' 7 And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the expanse, and the waters which [are] above the expanse: and it is so. 8 And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second. . . .

That the earth existed long before God said, "Let there be light"?

That God did not create light in vs. 3, but maybe called it forth?

That it never says when God created the waters, only that He separated them?

So you see, by the literal translation, vs. 2 clearly indicates the pre-existance of the earth for an indisclosed length of time.

And notice vs 5:

God calls the light, "Day" - with evening being the end of "Day" - and the darkness, "Night" - with morning being the end of "Night."

It makes a lot more poetic/prophetic sense to me than a scientific one! We all know that a day does not last from evening to morning. But, in th epoetic/prophetic sense, we see:

"and there is an evening, and there is a morning" =

"and there is an [end of 'Day,'] and there is an [end of 'Night'] =

"and there is an [end to ligseparation from light to darkness], and an [separation from darkness to light]

You see - if you stop trying to look at Genesis 1 scientifically and start reading it theologically - isn't it a lot cooler?!

[LadyGunivere]

you got it!

[eric]

Hey, Neb, for someone who has majored in science, that is real cool.

[nebula]

Thanks!

I've always wondered about the "evening and morning expression" - but then Mrs. SealedEternity's post provked me to find this "literal translation" and look up Gen 1 (found it here in case any of you were wanting to know).

As I was studying that and trying to sort it out, that's when the pieces fell together. I was like, "Oh that's so cool!" Now it finally makes sense to me!

I love studying Scripture this way!

[larryt]

Then can you acknowledge that according to the literal translation:

1 In the beginning of God's preparing the heavens and the earth -- 2 the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,

3 and God saith, `Let light be;' and light is. 4 And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness, 5 and God calleth to the light `Day,' and to the darkness He hath called `Night;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day one.

6 And God saith, `Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.' 7 And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the expanse, and the waters which [are] above the expanse: and it is so. 8 And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second. . . .

That the earth existed long before God said, "Let there be light"?

That God did not create light in vs. 3, but maybe called it forth?

That it never says when God created the waters, only that He separated them?

So you see, by the literal translation, vs. 2 clearly indicates the pre-existence of the earth for an indisclosed length of time.

And notice vs 5:

God calls the light, "Day" - with evening being the end of "Day" - and the darkness, "Night" - with morning being the end of "Night."

It makes a lot more poetic/prophetic sense to me than a scientific one! We all know that a day does not last from evening to morning. But, in th epoetic/prophetic sense, we see:

"and there is an evening, and there is a morning" =

"and there is an [end of 'Day,'] and there is an [end of 'Night'] =

"and there is an [end to ligseparation from light to darkness], and an [separation from darkness to light]

You see - if you stop trying to look at Genesis 1 scientifically and start reading it theologically - isn't it a lot cooler?!

Hi nebula,

Young's Lit. Trans. is not the most reliable. Gen. 1:1 is 7 word in Hebrew and have been studied in depth.

raysheth tells us when, In the beginning.

Elohim is the subject and tells us who - God

barah is well agree to mean created from nothing.

shawmahyim what - the heavens(plural)

ehrets what - the earth

2 words not translated - they the same word ayth indicating the direct object(s) heavens & earth.

The following is from Gleanings In Genesis by AW Pink. He says some pretty profound things and this is just the first paragraph.

The manner in which the Holy Scriptures open is worthy of their Divine Author. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth," and that is all that is here recorded concerning the original creation. Nothing is said which enables us to fix the date of their creation; nothing is revealed concerning their appearance or inhabitants; nothing is told us about the modus operandi of their Divine Architect. We do not know whether the primitive heaven and earth were created a few thousands, or many millions of years ago. We are not informed as to whether they were called into existence in a moment of time, or whether the process of their formation covered an interval of long ages. The bare fact is stated: "In the beginning God created," and nothing is added to gratify the curious. The opening sentence of Holy Writ is not to be philosophized about, but is presented as a statement of truth to be received with unquestioning faith.

We have to let the bible translate itself. In the 4th command(Ex. 20:11) Mose tells us that God made the heavens and the earth and all that is in them in 6 days and rested the 7th day as we are told to rest one literal day in seven. The context is what determines the translation. It is repeated in Ex. 31:17 again. It is not our job to try to make the bible conform to OUR UNDERSTANDING of science when there appears apparent contradictions.

Here's an interesting question for you nebula, as a scientist: Is the sun a "nuclear furnace?"

LT

[nebula]

The following is from Gleanings In Genesis by AW Pink. He says some pretty profound things and this is just the first paragraph.

The manner in which the Holy Scriptures open is worthy of their Divine Author. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth," and that is all that is here recorded concerning the original creation. Nothing is said which enables us to fix the date of their creation; nothing is revealed concerning their appearance or inhabitants; nothing is told us about the modus operandi of their Divine Architect. We do not know whether the primitive heaven and earth were created a few thousands, or many millions of years ago. We are not informed as to whether they were called into existence in a moment of time, or whether the process of their formation covered an interval of long ages. The bare fact is stated: "In the beginning God created," and nothing is added to gratify the curious. The opening sentence of Holy Writ is not to be philosophized about, but is presented as a statement of truth to be received with unquestioning faith.

I completely agree with this quote!

How long and when is not the point. So why is everyone so hung up about it?

Why don't you read Genesis 1 for what is is about?