Can a Genesis God be Explained from a Science Perspective? (part 1)

[viole]

Read it carefully. That is not what it says.

I read it carefully.

That is exactly what it says.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Etritonakin]

I read it carefully.

That is exactly what it says.

Ciao

- viole

You are incorrect in your assumption -as many have been. See edit of above. You must consider what the language allows if you are to say it is incorrect -not what people have assumed about it.

Also.... It does not state that both the heavens and the Earth were created on the first day -but in the beginning. The first "day" of Genesis began after God said let there be light...... on the earth which was already there

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

then......
Gen 1:2 And the earth was (became) without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
(why was darkness on the face of the deep -which was already there? don't know.)

and then....
And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (before the first "day")

and then.....
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light
(how did God let there be light? don't know.)

and only then....
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Gen 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 first day ever? the first time light ever shone upon the earth? not specified)

That is considering Genesis alone. The bible in its entirety does not even support the idea of the first day of Genesis being the initial creation of the Earth or heavens. For example... Satan had already rebelled when he interacted with man in Eden -and he previously staged his coup from beneath the clouds. God also told Job (or the idea was at least in the head of the writer, from that perspective) he had no clue about the time or particulars of the creation of the Earth.

Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Job 38:5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
Job 38:6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut
down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
Isa 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
Rev 12:8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Rev 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Eze 28:13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God;.............................
Eze 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God;...................
Eze 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
Eze 28:16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God:.........................

Heb_1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Heb_11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

 

[Ouroboros]

i would say yes.. science fails on two main points. #1 the big bang or the beginning - in science, you cannot create something from nothing. so that points to a higher power making something happen #2 the statistics against a planet giving life such as to the level of humans - in science the statistics are staggering, they had to create alternate universes to come up with more infinite rolling of the dice. God created humans for a reason and everything for us to enjoy, look after, and discover. #3 For science proving there is a God there is intelligent design that shows there is an artist, a poet, a mathematician, engineer, an all knowing God that created the universe and left his initials on all of creation such as an artist signs a painting. There is intelligent design to everything created, that is not random, but rather it is purposely, intricately, and thoughtfully created.

Still waiting for that name. Do you have a copy of the signature? A photo? I really, really, really want to see it. Please, don't keep it to yourself anymore!

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

It is a good defense, but it took a couple of hundred years to get over it, and so will it be with evolution. The catholic church today is amazing. I really like the new pope, however the church rejecting science today comprise mostly of evangelical Christians, and they don't have the same excuses though.

edit:

On another note, they didn't have the same excuses for killing Hypatia, 415 AD.

I just think it is important to remember that the advancement of science was done by a lot of individuals involved in the church as well (heck wasn't the Big Bang theory developed by a priest?), the church was not always quick to condemn, and if Europe didn't sink into total ignorance it was due to the church as well. I think it's a good lesson to remember that the church as an institution while brought some
Ills did a lot of good.

 

[viole]

You are incorrect in your assumption -as many have been. See edit of above. You must consider what the language allows if you are to say it is incorrect -not what people have assumed about it.

Also.... It does not state that both the heavens and the Earth were created on the first day -but in the beginning. The first "day" of Genesis began after God said let there be light...... on the earth which was already there

Who cares? If the earth was already there, then things are even worse.

Question for you: when He talks about the fourth day, that is when He created the stars, was the earth already there or not?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Ouroboros]

I just think it is important to remember that the advancement of science was done by a lot of individuals involved in the church as well (heck wasn't the Big Bang theory developed by a priest?), the church was not always quick to condemn, and if Europe didn't sink into total ignorance it was due to the church as well. I think it's a good lesson to remember that the church as an institution while brought some
Ills did a lot of good.

True. I'm not going to argue against that. Just like science has brought both good and bad, religious has too. Not just bad, but also good.

My post was really in response to this question, "P.S. I always wondered why some theists attack only evolution, when the Bible contradicts, on its first pages, even the most basic findings of astrophysics."

And my reflection was that theists used to attack astronomy just as evolution is being attacked today. It's a maturity process in the church and by believers. It takes time for believers and theists to conform to the new knowledge that upsets their set beliefs. I know. I was in the same boat, and even today, there are times when new discoveries upsets my own set beliefs, ideas, and such.

 

[Etritonakin]

Who cares? If the earth was already there, then things are even worse.

Question for you: when He talks about the fourth day, that is when He created the stars, was the earth already there or not?

Ciao

- viole

The question cannot be answered with a yes or no -because the question is flawed -just as the question "Are you the king of the Jews?" was flawed -to which Christ replied "Thou hast said".

If you don't care -stop caring. If you want to assume that the verse says every single star in the universe was created that day -do so.

 

[viole]

The question cannot be answered with a yes or no -because the question is flawed -just as the question "Are you the king of the Jews?" was flawed -to which Christ replied "Thou hast said".

If you don't care -stop caring. If you want to assume that the verse says every single star in the universe was created that day -do so.

It is a simple question. I can answer it without problems, from my vantage point. If you cannot, then everything it is written in the Bible is, well, useless.

The narrative says clearly that the stars have been created on the fourth day. And the earth predates the fourth day, if we assume a minimal amount of logic in the narrative.

Do you object to that?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Shad]

Read it carefully. That is not what it says. It does not say the Earth was formed on the first day.
It says that God created the heaven (universe) and the Earth in the beginning.

It states a chronological ordering which you ignore since it makes your case wrong

Then it says the Earth -at some point -became waste and ruin.
H1961
היה
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

Earth must exist for it to be waste and ruin

What follows is not the initial creation of the sun, moon and stars, etc... that has simply been an assumption.

An assumption to go with your other assumptions.

When God "made" the firmament and divided the waters below from the waters above, it was by affecting/altering what was already there (allowing light to reach the waters) -so "made" does not necessarily mean initial creation.

No it separates the waters of the Earth from that above the firmament, which is sky, as if there was water, liquid, in space.

Furthermore, there were "days" -rotations of the earth in relation to the sun -before it is stated that God "made" the greater and lesser lights. If one assumes this means initial creation, it certainly does not make sense. However it says that God made the two lights TO do something on that day -he did not make them on that day -he made them TO rule over the day and night.

There is no night and day without the sun. Rotation alone does not generate a day or night without a reference point to a star (sun) in the same solar system.

If I make a light to shine on something -it does not necessarily mean I made that light then.

Ignoring chronology as an ad hoc rescue. Its not as if the Bible doesn't say First Day at all.......

 

[Etritonakin]

It is a simple question. I can answer it without problems, from my vantage point. If you cannot, then everything it is written in the Bible is, well, useless.

The narrative says clearly that the stars have been created on the fourth day. And the earth predates the fourth day, if we assume a minimal amount of logic in the narrative.

Do you object to that?

Ciao

- viole

Isa 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

Rev_12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Num 24:17 I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Rev 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

1Co_15:41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

 

[Etritonakin]

Earth must exist for it to be waste and ruin

Yes -the earth must have first existed before it became waste and ruin! That's what I said -and that is what it says!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Shad]

Yes -the earth must have first existed before it became waste and ruin! That's what I said -and that is what it says!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well since the Sun comes after the Earth in the chronology of Genesis it shows Genesis to be false. The Sun predates the Earth. It formed first not after.

 

[Etritonakin]

It is a simple question. I can answer it without problems, from my vantage point. If you cannot, then everything it is written in the Bible is, well, useless.

The narrative says clearly that the stars have been created on the fourth day. And the earth predates the fourth day, if we assume a minimal amount of logic in the narrative.

Do you object to that?

Ciao

- viole

Yes. That is not what the narrative clearly says.

 

[Etritonakin]

Well since the Sun comes after the Earth in the chronology of Genesis it shows Genesis to be false. The Sun predates the Earth. It formed first not after.

No. Does not Genesis 1:1 clearly state that -in the beginning -the heaven was created before the earth?

 

[Shad]

No. Does not Genesis 1:1 clearly state that -in the beginning -the heaven was created before the earth?

No its says the Heavens and Earth not one before the other. The Sun comes at a later after the Earth and Heavens. At no point in Day 1 nor Day 2 is the Earth created at all, the Earth existed before the first Day. Heck the Sun is created on Day 4.

 

[Etritonakin]

No its says the Heavens and Earth not one before the other. The Sun comes at a later after the Earth and Heavens. At no point in Day 1 nor Day 2 is the Earth created at all, the Earth existed before the first Day. Heck the Sun is created on Day 4.

No -it says heaven before it says Earth. Obviously (sarcasm), that means chronological order -just as you assume everything else to be in chronological order . -because it says greater and lesser lights before it says stars.

 

[Shad]

No -it says heaven before it says Earth.

No it doesn't. It states "and" which is not "before" You confuse word ordering for chronology, nothing more

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NLT
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=KJV
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV

Obviously (sarcasm), that means chronological order -just as you assume everything else to be in chronological order . -because it says greater and lesser lights before it says stars.

When it says certain events happened in Days then yes there is a chronological ordering. Earth is not part of Day 1 but precedes it before the ordering of Days.

No verse identifies the greater light with daytime and the lesser light, (singular) with nighttime in Day 4. There are the Sun and the Moon. While the Moon does not contradict planetary formation theory it contradicts stellar formation thus the verse is is in error. Planets are formed by the resulting stellar disk formed after a star is formed. The disk required gravity which is provided by the star

http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/discovering_planets_beyond/how-do-planets-form

 

[sandy whitelinger]

What in science do we know controls all things and holds the Universe together that could be called God?

As long as we only are able to test and perceive things in this universe based on our ability to perceive this universe we will only describe this universe ergo, no, science will never prove God.

 

[viole]

Yes. That is not what the narrative clearly says.

Of course it does:

And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years,15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so.16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth,18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

The stars have been made during the 4th day. After the earth and water. What could be more clear-cut than that?

By the way, there is, at least, another scientific absurdity just in these few lines. Can you spot it?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Etritonakin]

Isa 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

Zep 3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

Your confusion is understandable.