• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

In Genesis the plants were created before the sun moon and stars

Brian2

Veteran Member
If the tree of life (which can grant people immortality) was created on day 3 I think they should have mentioned it in Genesis 1... though I guess I don't have a strong argument for that.

I have re-read Genesis 2 and decided it was probably on day 6 that God planted out Eden, same day that Adam was created.
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
I have re-read Genesis 2 and decided it was probably on day 6 that God planted out Eden, same day that Adam was created.
It looks like Answers in Genesis (YECs) also say that Adam and Eve were created on day 6....
But then God rested for a day....
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Citation needed.

Here's one that you will love.
Here is another that ends up as science does, with a not certain conclusion because some scientists disagree.

Basically science does not know for sure about the clouds but the Bible day 1 hypothesis is also what many scientists are saying but probably don't realise that they are confirming the Bible.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
It looks like Answers in Genesis (YECs) also say that Adam and Eve were created on day 6....
But then God rested for a day....

Genesis 1 tells us that Adam and Eve were created on day 6.
Genesis 2 imo is not a separate creation story but is the same creation story as Genesis 1 and concentrates on man and when God formed man.
It can be read as saying that God began to form man from the dirt by evolution and started when single cell microbes were formed before the multicell first plants. This was maybe on day 3 if we are comparing Genesis 1 with Genesis 2 accounts.
The actual creation of man however is not when man was formed from the dirt, it was when God breathed into Adam, the breathe of life on day 6.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Here's one that you will love.
Here is another that ends up as science does, with a not certain conclusion because some scientists disagree.

Basically science does not know for sure about the clouds but the Bible day 1 hypothesis is also what many scientists are saying but probably don't realise that they are confirming the Bible.
Please be serious. Using pseudoscience websites is the same as admitting that you are wrong.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
You're forgetting the Muslims. It's like saying that that the Psalms are only revered by the Jews while forgetting the Christians.

Muslims follow the Quran. The god described in the Old Testament of the Bible and the New Testament of the Bible are quite different from the god of the Quran. These are all clearly very different gods, as described.

Are you now sorry that you're mistaken because it is in fact "most"?
Nope.

I also realize that the number of people who believe in a thing has no bearing on whether or not that thing is actually true.
 

Ajax

Active Member
It is to point out that in the creation story the plants (and fruit trees) were created before the Sun, Moon and stars and this conflicts with mainstream science. So it seems that a literal reading of it is not true even though old earth creationists try to make it fit with science.
So why the conclusion must be that the literal reading is not true, and not that the whole story is not true?

In the story the days are supposed to be literal, because each one has an evening and a morning.
Also for those who think that the Bible is inerrant, Exodus 20:11 states "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."
 
Last edited:

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
So why the conclusion must be that the literal reading is not true, and not that the whole story is not true?

In the story the days are supposed to be literal, because each one has an evening and a morning.
Also for those who think that the Bible is inerrant, Exodus 20:11 states "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."
Perhaps it could mean "For in the creation poem, God made the heavens and the earth, etc, in six days". Though I believe that the whole story is not true.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
It looks like Answers in Genesis (YECs) also say that Adam and Eve were created on day 6....
But then God rested for a day....
That is one reason why the 'days' of creation must refer to a period of time with beginning and an end.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Perhaps it could mean "For in the creation poem, God made the heavens and the earth, etc, in six days". Though I believe that the whole story is not true.
Obviously you have that right to believe that the account is not true. That is in part described in the Bible in many different ways.
 

Ajax

Active Member
You didn't understand the question?????
No I didn't, because when you wrote the question, I had not posted anything on this thread. Also I have said many times that I'm agnostic and science orientated. So why should I believe that the earth is flat?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
No I didn't, because when you wrote the question, I had not posted anything on this thread. Also I have said many times that I'm agnostic and science orientated. So why should I believe that the earth is flat?
OK, I just asked. Thanks for that.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Here's one that you will love.
Here is another that ends up as science does, with a not certain conclusion because some scientists disagree.

Basically science does not know for sure about the clouds but the Bible day 1 hypothesis is also what many scientists are saying but probably don't realise that they are confirming the Bible.
No conformation involving science. Your arguing from ignorance' to justify an ancient scripture. Yes, scientist disagree on some things and there are unknowns concerning the origins of the universe, but there are no hazy unknowns concerning the history of our solar system, and the physics of the formation of the planets including the earth,

You need to look at the Creation synario of Genesis honestly and realize it describes a very small geocentric universe created in a short time frame. and not the vast universe and solar system billions of years old, and the evolution of life over a period of 3.7+ billions.

The simple vastness of the universe is conceptually beyond any interpretation of Genesis.

It is much more practical and honest to consider the scientific perspective of the vastness of the universe in time and space is a witness to the scientific view of the glory of Creation without error on a scale far beyond any interpretation of the Bible.
 

excreationist

Married mouth-breather
The simple vastness of the universe is conceptually beyond any interpretation of Genesis.

It is much more practical and honest to consider the scientific perspective of the vastness of the universe in time and space is a witness to the scientific view of the glory of Creation without error on a scale far beyond any interpretation of the Bible.
Genesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:22, and Hebrews 11:12 talk about the number of stars in the sky being roughly the same as the grains of sand on the seashore - which is roughly true even though the naked eye can only see several thousand stars in the sky. Though it also says that this number is the same as the number of descendants that Abraham will have.
Though having lots of stars isn't necessarily vast depending on the size and spacing of the stars.
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Genesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:22, and Hebrews 11:12 talk about the number of stars in the sky being roughly the same as the grains of sand on the seashore - which is roughly true even though the naked eye can only see several thousand stars in the sky. Though it also says that this number is the same as the number of descendants that Abraham will have.
Though having lots of stars isn't necessarily vast depending on the size and spacing of the stars.
true
 
Top