Genesis chapter 1

[tomasortega]

hello, my name is tomas ortega, and i am a non theist in the process of reading the bible. i came up with a few questions and comments after reading genesis chapter one. feel free to answer or comment.

sorry in advance about the caps. i like to type in all caps on my word pad, so rather than write it all again im pasting.


1. GENESIS 1: 5 “…AND THERE WAS EVENING, AND THERE WAS MORNING, THE FIRST DAY”
GENESIS 1: 8 “…AND THERE WAS EVENING AND THERE WAS MORNING, THE SECOND DAY”
GENESIS 1: 13 “… AND THERE WAS EVENING AND THERE WAS MORNING, THE THIRD DAY”
GENESIS 1: 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.”

FIRST, HOW CAN THERE BE EVENING AND MORNING FOR THE FIRST THREE “DAYS” OF CREATION WHEN THE SUN AND MOON ARE ONLY CREATED ON THE FOURTH DAY? THE VERY DEFINITION OF MORNING/EVENING IS COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON THE SUN “RISING/SETTING”.

SECOND, LIFE OR VEGETATION IS IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT THE SUN, WHICH GENESIS 1: 12, 13 CONTRADICTS, CLAIMING VEGETATION EXISTED BEFORE THE SUN. THE BIBLE DESCRIBES THE SUN’S ROLE OR FUNCTION AS SIMPLY MARKING/GOVERNING THE DAY AND NOTHING ELSE.

THIRD, THE MOON IS DESCRIBED AS A SECOND AND INDEPENDENT LIGHT DEDICATED TO MARKING/GOVERNING THE NIGHT. GENESIS 1: 16 CLAIMS GOD CREATED TWO GREAT LIGHTS WHEN IN FACT THE MOON IS NOT A LIGHT EMITTING PLANET, THE MOON SIMPLY REFLECTS THE SUN’S LIGHT, SO TO SAY THAT GOD MADE TWO GREAT LIGHTS IS INCORRECT. THERE IS ONLY ONE LIGHT, THE SUN.

2. GENESIS 1: 3,4 “AND GOD SAID, “LET THERE BE LIGHT”, AND THERE WAS LIGHT. GOD SAW THAT THE LIGHT WAS GOOD….”

FIRST, WHO DID GOD SPEAK TO WHEN HE ASKED FOR LIGHT? WHO DID GOD SUBMIT HIS ORDER OR COMMAND TO? IS THERE A CUSTOM, MADE-TO-ORDER CREATION FACTORY SOMEWHERE OUT THERE?

SECOND, ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE GOD IS OMNISCIENT, SO OBVIOUSLY HE KNEW WHAT LIGHT WAS EVEN BEFORE HE CREATED IT. AND HIS CONFIDENT COMMAND CONFIRMS THIS “LET THERE BE LIGHT!”, LIKE HE WAS CERTAIN WHAT HE WANTED EVEN BEFORE HE WANTED IT. BUT THEN WE SEE GOD ANALYZING LIGHT TO SEE WETHER OR NOT IT WAS ANY GOOD. AND FINALLY HE DECIDED…”…GOD SAW THAT THE LIGHT WAS GOOD….” WHICH BEGS THE QUESTION: WHY DOES AN OMNISCIENT BEING NEED TO ANALYZE AND DECIDE WETHER OR NOT HIS/HER CREATION IS ANY GOOD WHEN HIS/HER OMNISCIENCE SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR THIS KNOWLEDGE IN THE FIRST PLACE? WE SEE THIS ALL THROUGHOUT CHAPTER ONE.

3. GENESIS 1: 4 ”GOD SAW THAT THE LIGHT WAS GOOD, AND HE SEPARATED THE LIGHT FROM THE DARKNESS.”
GENESIS 1:17-18 ”GOD SET THEM(LIGHTS) IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO….SEPARATE LIGHT FROM DARKNESS.”

SO, ON THE FIRST DAY GOD SEPARATES LIGHT FROM DARKNESS ALL BY HIMSELF, AND THEN ON THE FOURTH DAY HE CREATES THE SUN AND MOON TO SEPARATE LIGHT FROM DARKNESS AGAIN? I CAN UNDERSTAND THE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST NON BELIEVERS WRONGFULLY CLAIMING GENESIS 1 CONTRADICTS GENESIS 2 WHEN GENESIS 1 CAN BE SIMPLY EXPLAINED AS PROVIDING A GENERAL OUTLINE OF CREATION WHILE GENESIS 2 GOES INTO DETAIL, BUT THIS HAS NO SUCH CONTEXT. IT IS LAID OUT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, DAY 1 THROUGH DAY 6, SAME CHAPTER.


4. GENESIS 1: 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.
GENESIS 1:17 “GOD SET THEM IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH.”

IT IS CLEAR THAT WHOEVER AUTHORED GENESIS WORKED OFF OF THE ANCIENT CONCEPT THAT PLANET EARTH IS THE CENTER AND SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE UNIVERSE, AND THAT EVERYTHING REVOLVED AROUND IT. WE CAN SEE THIS RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING. FIRST GOD CREATED EARTH (GIVING IT PRECEDENCE AND AUTHORITY, FEEDING OFF OF THE WHOLE “FIRST BORN” TREND FOUND ALL THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE) MAKING PLANET EARTH THE CENTER OR BUILDING BLOCK OF CREATION, AND THEN CREATING EVERYTHING AROUND IT TO SERVE OR ENHANCE IT, CONFIRMED IN VERSE 16 WHEN GOD DECIDES TO BRING IN THE SUN/MOON AND ALL OTHER STARS/PLANETS ONLY ON THE FOURTH DAY, WELL INTO CREATION, WITH THE SINGLE PURPOSE OF SERVIG EARTH BY LIGHTING IT. ALSO IN VERSE 14 “… LET THEM SERVE AS SIGNS TO MARK SEASONS, AND DAYS AND YEARS, AND LET THEM BE LIGHTS IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH…” THIS EXPOSES THE LIMITED MIND OF THE AUTHOR, THINKING PLANET EARTH OUTDATES EVERYHTING IN EXISTENCE AND THAT EVERYTHING ELSE REVOLVES AROUND IT.

ANOTHER SIGN THE BIBLE STORIES WERE INVENTED BY AVERAGE, UNINSPIRED HUMANS LIMITED TO THE KNOWLEDGE AND REASON OF THEIR TIME AND CULTURE, IS THE CLAIM IN GENESIS 1:17 “GOD SET THEM IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH.”
OBVIOUSLY THE SUN/MOON/STARS ONLY APPEAR TO BE IN THE EXPANSE OF THE EARTHLY SKY. AND YES, THE BIBLE CLEARLY MEANS EARTHLY SKY, AS CONFIRMED IN VERSE 7 AND 8 “…GOD MADE THE EXPANSE AND SEPARATED THE WATER UNDER THE EXPANSE FROM THE WATER ABOVE IT. AND IT WAS SO. GOD CALLED THE EXPANSE SKY.” ALSO IN VERSE 20 “AND GOD SAID… LET BIRDS FLY ABOVE THE EARTH ACROSS THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY.” OBVIOUSLY BIRDS CAN’T FLY IN OUTER SPACE. ANOTHER CONFIRMATION OF THIS IS FOUND IN MATTHEW 2:9 “….THEY WENT ON THEIR WAY, AND THE STAR THEY HAD SEEN IN THE EAST WENT AHEAD OF THEM UNTIL IT STOPPED OVER THE PLACE WHERE THE CHILD WAS.” HOW CAN A STAR MOVE FROM ABOVE ONE EXACT LOCATION ON EARTH AND STOP RIGHT ABOVE ANOTHER?

5. GENESIS 1:28 “….FILL THE EARTH AND SUBDUE IT. RULE OVER THE FISH OF THE SEA AND THE BIRDS OF THE AIR AND OVER EVERY LIVING CREATURE THAT MOVES ON THE GROUND.”

HOW COULD EARLY HUMANS SUBDUE AND RULE OVER ALL THE ANIMALS ON EARTH? ESPECIALLY IN THE BEGINNING WHEN HUMANS WERE FEW, HECK HOW DID ADAM AND EVE SURVIVE AMONG ALL THOSE WILD ANIMALS IN THE FIRST PLACE? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AVERAGE 150-200LBS HUMAN BEINGS HERE WITHOUT FIREARMS OR ANY OTHER SOPHISTICATED WEAPONS, UP AGAINST TIGERS, LIONS, BEARS ETC. BUT THAT’S JUST SPEAKING MODERN ANIMALS. WE HAVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF DINOSAURS. SO HOW EXACTLY DID ADAM SUBDUE AND RULE OVER GIANT FLESH EATING MONSTERS LIKE T-REX? SHARP STICKS? BOW AND ARROW? GOOD LUCK. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE HUMAN SPECIES TO EVEN SURVIVE UNLESS ADAM AND EVE WERE THEMSELFES GIANT APE LIKE BEASTS ABLE TO PHYSICALLY DEFEND THEMSELFES. BUT THAT WOULD MEAN THE HUMAN SPECIES EVOLVED INTO MODERN HUMANS SINCE THEN WHICH WOULD VALIDATE EVOLUTION, AND GOD KNOWS WE DON’T WANT THAT.

6. GENESIS 1:29 “THEN GOD SAID: I GIVE YOU EVERY SEED-BEARING PLANT ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH AND EVERY TREE THAT HAS FRUIT WITH SEED IN IT. THEY WILL BE YOURS FOR FOOD.”

GENESIS 2:17 “…YOU MUST NOT EAT FROM THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.”

ACCORDING TO CHAPTER ONE GOD PROMISES ADAM AND EVE EVERY SINGLE PLANT AND FRUIT ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH AS FOOD WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTIONS. ACCORDING TO CHAPTER TWO GOD DOES HAVE RESTRICTIONS, NAMELY THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL. THERE IS NO CLAIMING CHAPTER TWO GOES INTO DETAIL HERE, BECAUSE IN CHAPTER ONE GOD TALKS IN ABSOLUTES CLAIMING EVERY PLANT AND EVERY TREE ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH LEAVING NO ROOM FOR EXCEPTIONS, MAKING THIS A CONTRADICTION. SO WHICH IS THE CORRECT VERSION?

7. GENESIS 1:30 “AND TO ALL THE BEASTS OF THE EARTH AND ALL THE BIRDS OF THE AIR AND ALL THE CREATURES THAT MOVE ON THE GROUND-EVERYTHING THAT HAS BREATH OF LIFE IN IT- I GIVE EVERY GREEN PLANT FOR FOOD. AND IT WAS SO”

ACCORDING TO THIS PASSAGE ALL ANIMALS/DINOSAURS WERE HERBIVORES. AGAIN IT SPEAKS IN ABSOLUTE TERMS USING WORDS LIKE “ALL” , “EVERY” AND “EVERYTHING” LEAVING NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION. OBVIOUSLY MANY DINOSAURS WERE CARNIVORES, SOME, SUCH AS T-REX EXCLUSIVELY. MANY MODERN ANIMALS ARE CARNIVORES AND OMNIVORES AS WELL.

 

[ChristineES]

There are some people who believe the the first chapter or 2 are symbolic. It was passed on by mouth long before it was every written down. With that in mind, then each "day" mentioned was not a literal day but each day could have been millions or even billions of years. Which would mean that man and woman was created a million or a billion years after the animals.

 

[gnostic]

Please don't write in All CAP....next time. I find it difficult to read a lot of text in all upper case, because I lose concentration (and will lose interest by mid-way).

If you really must, next time, keep the whole text in lower case.

 

[gnostic]

first, how can there be evening and morning for the first three "days" of creation when the sun and moon are only created on the fourth day? the very definition of morning/evening is completely dependent on the sun "rising/setting".

I (and other like you), have asked such questions before. None of the answer were ever satisfactory.

The truth is that you can have morning and evening without the sun, and according to the bible, the sun and moon don't exist until the 4th day. Unless, God happened to have a gigantic flash light, and switch it on and off.

Anyway some Christians don't believe the Creation story literally, and say that's it is simply a parable. That's why ChristineES is calling the story is possibly symbolic.

 

[tomasortega]

There are some people who believe the the first chapter or 2 are symbolic. It was passed on by mouth long before it was every written down. With that in mind, then each "day" mentioned was not a literal day but each day could have been millions or even billions of years. Which would mean that man and woman was created a million or a billion years after the animals.

problem with that is that god created all the wild animals(land) and humans on the same (sixth) day, or in the same "creating session" if you will. and the only way your argument would make sense is if millions of years passed within that so called 6th day from when god created the dinosaurs first and then the humans later that day. but then that would mean that vegetation/fruits(created on the third day) existed on earth for billions of years before the sun was created(fourth), which is obviously impossible. and besides the bible doesnt mention anything about land animals dying and god recreating them in a smaller form right before adam got to name them. and also god did not tell the animals they could eat the plants till after he created man. and i could go on and on.

 

[ChristineES]

problem with that is that god created all the wild animals(land) and humans on the same (sixth) day, or in the same "creating session" if you will. and the only way your argument would make sense is if millions of years passed within that so called 6th day from when god created the dinosaurs first and then the humans later that day. but then that would mean that vegetation/fruits(created on the third day) existed on earth for billions of years before the sun was created(fourth), which is obviously impossible. and besides the bible doesnt mention anything about land animals dying and god recreating them in a smaller form right before adam got to name them. and also god did not tell the animals they could eat the plants till after he created man. and i could go on and on.

The fact remains, it doesn't really say how long the animals were here before humans were made. There are 24 hours in one day- so you can assume that say, animals were created at 10:00 AM and humans at 6:00 PM- which could be thousands or millions of years. We really don't know at all.

 

[tomasortega]

I (and other like you), have asked such questions before. None of the answer were ever satisfactory.

The truth is that you can have morning and evening without the sun, and according to the bible, the sun and moon don't exist until the 4th day. Unless, God happened to have a gigantic flash light, and switch it on and off.

Anyway some Christians don't believe the Creation story literally, and say that's it is simply a parable. That's why ChristineES is calling the story is possibly symbolic.

im having trouble understanding how the creation story is a parable or symbolic.

either it is true or false. did those things happen or not? if we are going to say that genesis 1 and 2 did not really happen, then what about the rest of the bible?

if some christians are saying the whole snake selling eve a fruit thing did not really happen, then what about moses parting the sea, pharaoh and the plagues? jesus walking on water and healing the sick. is it all just a parable? all symbolic?

how do we know what is truth and what is fiction?

 

[tomasortega]

The fact remains, it doesn't really say how long the animals were here before humans were made. There are 24 hours in one day- so you can assume that say, animals were created at 10:00 AM and humans at 6:00 PM- which could be thousands or millions of years. We really don't know at all.

do you agree that vegetation on earth is impossible without the sun? if so, then you denounce the chronological accuracy of the bible. if you denounce the chronological accuracy of the bible then who is to say humans werent created before animals? who is to say humans are not just an evolved species of animal?

where does personal interpretation meet reality? if god really exists why is he trying to confuse the crap out of us with the bible?

 

[Dunemeister]

Here are some notes I made in preparation for teaching this text. They may help.

Theme

The prologue (Genesis 1:1 - 2:3) announces that the God of the covenant community is the same as the Creator of the cosmos. God is the implicit king of this cosmos, making provision, establishing order, and commissioning regents. The life-support systems of air, water, and land provide creation's abundance of all sorts of living species with sustenance and space to live. It is the stage on which the drama of history under God will be played.

God steps creatively into the primordial abyss and darkness to transform it into a magnificent, ordered, and balanced universe. Those who submit themselves to the Creator's rule are assured that their history will not end in tragic darkness and chaos but will continue in triumphant light and order.

As God unfolds the drama of creation in successive days, building to a climax, so God develops the drama of history through successive epochs, which reach a dramatic climax when all volitional creatures bow to Christ (Romans 8:19-20; Ephesians 1:7-10; Philippians 2:9-11).

The order of this creation will undergird God's later revelations regarding humanity's social order. His law is in harmony with the created order. Thus, to flout his revealed moral order is to contradict creation, his created reality.

Outline

Summary statement of the creation of the cosmos (1:1)
Negative condition of the earth before creation (1:2)
Creation by God's Word (1:3 – 31)
Summary statement of the creation of the cosmos (2:1)
Epilogue: Sabbath rest (2:2 – 3)

Process of creation

The creation account emphasizes the power, majesty, and wisdom of the Creator. The process of creation follows a pattern of announcement/commandment → separation or filling → report → naming → evaluation → chronological framework.

Each day begins with an announcement/commandment: “And God said let there be.” Each event of creation occurs according to God's expressed will and through the agency of his word. Speech bonds God intimately with his creation and overcomes the primeval condition of chaos and emptiness.

God's word then brings about separation or filling, either dividing creation into aspects like day/night, waters above/below, heaven/earth, or land/water; or causing those aspects to be filled with something like sun/moon/stars, birds/fish, or land/sea animals.

The command is followed by the narrator's report of what happens. “And so God made” (or equiva-lent). Thus everything exists as a result of God's express will.
God follows this report by naming what has been created. “And he called.” Naming is an indication of dominion, revealing God as supreme ruler. Even the negative aspects of the primordial reality – chaos and emptiness – are under God's dominion and are brought under his protective restraints.

God then evaluates. “God saw that it was good.” Everything, including the bounded darkness and sea, satisfies God's purpose. Humanity has nothing to fear from creation. Accompanying God's evaluation is is blessing, i.e., potency for life. God blesses his creatures with procreativity.

Finally, the acts of creation follow a chronological framework. The numbers throughout the account attest to God's thoughtful and timely shaping of creation.

Progress of creation

The narrator constructs the story with billowing detail and movement. More space is devoted to successive days until the climactic apex of creation, when motion ceases and God rests. The creation account is divided into two triads, which contrast the unformed (Heb: tohu) -- Days 1 - 3, and unfilled (Heb: bohu) -- Days 4 - 6, state of the earth when the account begins.

Days 1 - 3 counter the chaos and impose order:

Day 1 -- Light, dividing light from darkness
Day 2 -- Expanse, dividing waters above from waters below
Day 3 -- Land, dividing land from water and waters below from each other

Days 4 - 6 counter the emptiness and fill the earth with life:

Day 4 -- Great lights, rule the day and the night
Day 5 -- Birds and fish, rule the seas and the air
Day 6 -- Animals (who don't rule, that's humans' job)

Notice that 1 corresponds with 4 and so forth.

The movement and development of each triad reveals a progression within creation. The first triad separates the formless chaos into three static spheres. In the second triad, the spheres that house and shelter life are filled with the moving forms of sun, moon, stars, and living creatures. The inhabitants of the second triad rule over the corresponding sphere:the sun and moon (poetically) rule the the darkness, while humanity (head over everything) (actually) rules the earth.

Each triad moves from heaven to earth (land) and ends with the earth bringing forth (vegetation, animals, people). The number of creative acts also increases within each triad: from a single creative act (1/4) to one creative act with two aspects (2/5) to two separate creative acts (3/6).

Action also escalates within each triad. Within the first triad, there is just a simple movement from darkness to light, from firmament and seas to growing vegetation. Within the second triad, there is an eruption of energy: sun and moon arch across the sky, birds and fish swarm the air and sea; land animals roam the ground. The lights follow a predictable pattern; the animals' movement is bounded by instinctive patterns of migration; humanity have the greatest freedom, bounded simply by the earth itself.

The entire account is unified by a basic week time structure. Structure affirms the consonance and symmetry, the harmony and balance in God's world. It definitely does not imply a literal seven-day progression.
++++

I adapted this from the work of several theologians I had read at the time (a few years back now). There's a lot more one could talk about, of course, but I think just noting the poetic features of the text go some distance to answering many of your questions. Basically, the text of Genesis causes myriad problems when we treat it as though it were a journalistic account of creation. It's not. It's a poetic theological account.

It's also true that the ancient Hebrews who wrote the account originally used the symbols and religious myths available at the time. What else would they have used? Thus we see the primordial chaos as the backdrop for creation.

On the other hand, there's much that distinguishes this text from its pagan counterparts. In almost all pagan stories of creation, creation is the end product of massive effort and/or warfare by the gods. But here, God just speaks "and it was so." There is also a notable lack of bloodshed in the story, which undercuts the notion that violence is somehow inherent in nature (human, divine, or material), a very popular ancient near eastern pagan view.

So yes, if you treat the text the way it's not supposed to be treated, it looks like so much rubbish. If not, not.

 

[Riverwolf]

1. GENESIS 1: 5 “…AND THERE WAS EVENING, AND THERE WAS MORNING, THE FIRST DAY”
GENESIS 1: 8 “…AND THERE WAS EVENING AND THERE WAS MORNING, THE SECOND DAY”
GENESIS 1: 13 “… AND THERE WAS EVENING AND THERE WAS MORNING, THE THIRD DAY”
GENESIS 1: 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.”

FIRST, HOW CAN THERE BE EVENING AND MORNING FOR THE FIRST THREE “DAYS” OF CREATION WHEN THE SUN AND MOON ARE ONLY CREATED ON THE FOURTH DAY? THE VERY DEFINITION OF MORNING/EVENING IS COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON THE SUN “RISING/SETTING”.

To the ancient Hebrews, light was independent of the Sun. We now know this is not true.

SECOND, LIFE OR VEGETATION IS IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT THE SUN, WHICH GENESIS 1: 12, 13 CONTRADICTS, CLAIMING VEGETATION EXISTED BEFORE THE SUN. THE BIBLE DESCRIBES THE SUN’S ROLE OR FUNCTION AS SIMPLY MARKING/GOVERNING THE DAY AND NOTHING ELSE.

As far as the ancient Hebrews were concerned, that's all the Sun was meant for. Remember that they were living side-by-side with people who were worshiping the Sun as a deity.

THIRD, THE MOON IS DESCRIBED AS A SECOND AND INDEPENDENT LIGHT DEDICATED TO MARKING/GOVERNING THE NIGHT.

GENESIS 1: 16 CLAIMS GOD CREATED TWO GREAT LIGHTS WHEN IN FACT THE MOON IS NOT A LIGHT EMITTING PLANET, THE MOON SIMPLY REFLECTS THE SUN’S LIGHT, SO TO SAY THAT GOD MADE TWO GREAT LIGHTS IS INCORRECT. THERE IS ONLY ONE LIGHT, THE SUN.

There was no way for the ancient Hebrews to know that the Moon reflects the Sun's light.

2.

GENESIS 1: 3,4 “AND GOD SAID, “LET THERE BE LIGHT”, AND THERE WAS LIGHT. GOD SAW THAT THE LIGHT WAS GOOD….”

FIRST, WHO DID GOD SPEAK TO WHEN HE ASKED FOR LIGHT? WHO DID GOD SUBMIT HIS ORDER OR COMMAND TO? IS THERE A CUSTOM, MADE-TO-ORDER CREATION FACTORY SOMEWHERE OUT THERE?

Nobody.

"11. Cohortatives: Like nearly all translators, I convey the cohortative as "let me" or "let us" or "may I" or "may we." Unfortunately, these English forms suggest permission, as if the person using the cohortative is asking to be allowed to do something. ...the Hebrew does not usually have such a connotation. it merely expresses the person's wish or intend, without necessarily implying that action or permission by anyone else is necessary." (Richard Elliot Friedman, "Commentary on the Torah", Notes on the Translation.)

3.

GENESIS 1: 4 ”GOD SAW THAT THE LIGHT WAS GOOD, AND HE SEPARATED THE LIGHT FROM THE DARKNESS.”

GENESIS 1:17-18 ”GOD SET THEM(LIGHTS) IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO….SEPARATE LIGHT FROM DARKNESS.”

SO, ON THE FIRST DAY GOD SEPARATES LIGHT FROM DARKNESS ALL BY HIMSELF, AND THEN ON THE FOURTH DAY HE CREATES THE SUN AND MOON TO SEPARATE LIGHT FROM DARKNESS AGAIN? I CAN UNDERSTAND THE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST NON BELIEVERS WRONGFULLY CLAIMING GENESIS 1 CONTRADICTS GENESIS 2 WHEN GENESIS 1 CAN BE SIMPLY EXPLAINED AS PROVIDING A GENERAL OUTLINE OF CREATION WHILE GENESIS 2 GOES INTO DETAIL, BUT THIS HAS NO SUCH CONTEXT. IT IS LAID OUT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, DAY 1 THROUGH DAY 6, SAME CHAPTER.

No. The Sun and Moon are meant to be seasonal markers according to the text; the light and darkness are already separated.

4.

GENESIS 1: 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.

GENESIS 1:17 “GOD SET THEM IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH.”

IT IS CLEAR THAT WHOEVER AUTHORED GENESIS WORKED OFF OF THE ANCIENT CONCEPT THAT PLANET EARTH IS THE CENTER AND SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE UNIVERSE, AND THAT EVERYTHING REVOLVED AROUND IT. WE CAN SEE THIS RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING. FIRST GOD CREATED EARTH (GIVING IT PRECEDENCE AND AUTHORITY, FEEDING OFF OF THE WHOLE “FIRST BORN” TREND FOUND ALL THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE)...

I have to stop you here for a second to point out that in much of Genesis, it's actually the second-born who gets all the glory.

...MAKING PLANET EARTH THE CENTER OR BUILDING BLOCK OF CREATION, AND THEN CREATING EVERYTHING AROUND IT TO SERVE OR ENHANCE IT, CONFIRMED IN VERSE 16 WHEN GOD DECIDES TO BRING IN THE SUN/MOON AND ALL OTHER STARS/PLANETS ONLY ON THE FOURTH DAY, WELL INTO CREATION, WITH THE SINGLE PURPOSE OF SERVIG EARTH BY LIGHTING IT. ALSO IN

VERSE 14 “… LET THEM SERVE AS SIGNS TO MARK SEASONS, AND DAYS AND YEARS, AND LET THEM BE LIGHTS IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH…” THIS EXPOSES THE LIMITED MIND OF THE AUTHOR, THINKING PLANET EARTH OUTDATES EVERYHTING IN EXISTENCE AND THAT EVERYTHING ELSE REVOLVES AROUND IT.

...What makes you think the ancient Hebrews, or, more specifically, author "P", had anything indicating otherwise that the Earth was the center of the universe?

ANOTHER SIGN THE BIBLE STORIES WERE INVENTED BY AVERAGE, UNINSPIRED HUMANS LIMITED TO THE KNOWLEDGE AND REASON OF THEIR TIME AND CULTURE, IS THE CLAIM IN

GENESIS 1:17 “GOD SET THEM IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH.”

OBVIOUSLY THE SUN/MOON/STARS ONLY APPEAR TO BE IN THE EXPANSE OF THE EARTHLY SKY. AND YES, THE BIBLE CLEARLY MEANS EARTHLY SKY, AS CONFIRMED IN VERSE 7 AND 8 “…GOD MADE THE EXPANSE AND SEPARATED THE WATER UNDER THE EXPANSE FROM THE WATER ABOVE IT. AND IT WAS SO. GOD CALLED THE EXPANSE SKY.” ALSO IN VERSE 20 “AND GOD SAID… LET BIRDS FLY ABOVE THE EARTH ACROSS THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY.” OBVIOUSLY BIRDS CAN’T FLY IN OUTER SPACE.

Again, I have to point out that the ancient Hebrews had NO IDEA how expansive the universe really is.

5.

GENESIS 1:28 “….FILL THE EARTH AND SUBDUE IT. RULE OVER THE FISH OF THE SEA AND THE BIRDS OF THE AIR AND OVER EVERY LIVING CREATURE THAT MOVES ON THE GROUND.”

HOW COULD EARLY HUMANS SUBDUE AND RULE OVER ALL THE ANIMALS ON EARTH? ESPECIALLY IN THE BEGINNING WHEN HUMANS WERE FEW, HECK HOW DID ADAM AND EVE SURVIVE AMONG ALL THOSE WILD ANIMALS IN THE FIRST PLACE? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AVERAGE 150-200LBS HUMAN BEINGS HERE WITHOUT FIREARMS OR ANY OTHER SOPHISTICATED WEAPONS, UP AGAINST TIGERS, LIONS, BEARS ETC. BUT THAT’S JUST SPEAKING MODERN ANIMALS. WE HAVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF DINOSAURS. SO HOW EXACTLY DID ADAM SUBDUE AND RULE OVER GIANT FLESH EATING MONSTERS LIKE T-REX? SHARP STICKS? BOW AND ARROW? GOOD LUCK. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE HUMAN SPECIES TO EVEN SURVIVE UNLESS ADAM AND EVE WERE THEMSELFES GIANT APE LIKE BEASTS ABLE TO PHYSICALLY DEFEND THEMSELFES. BUT THAT WOULD MEAN THE HUMAN SPECIES EVOLVED INTO MODERN HUMANS SINCE THEN WHICH WOULD VALIDATE EVOLUTION, AND GOD KNOWS WE DON’T WANT THAT.

...see above comments.

6.

GENESIS 1:29 “THEN GOD SAID: I GIVE YOU EVERY SEED-BEARING PLANT ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH AND EVERY TREE THAT HAS FRUIT WITH SEED IN IT. THEY WILL BE YOURS FOR FOOD.”

GENESIS 2:17 “…YOU MUST NOT EAT FROM THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.”

ACCORDING TO CHAPTER ONE GOD PROMISES ADAM AND EVE EVERY SINGLE PLANT AND FRUIT ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH AS FOOD WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTIONS. ACCORDING TO CHAPTER TWO GOD DOES HAVE RESTRICTIONS, NAMELY THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL. THERE IS NO CLAIMING CHAPTER TWO GOES INTO DETAIL HERE, BECAUSE IN CHAPTER ONE GOD TALKS IN ABSOLUTES CLAIMING EVERY PLANT AND EVERY TREE ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH LEAVING NO ROOM FOR EXCEPTIONS, MAKING THIS A CONTRADICTION. SO WHICH IS THE CORRECT VERSION?

Chapter 1 was written by a different person that Chapters 2 and 3.

7.

GENESIS 1:30 “AND TO ALL THE BEASTS OF THE EARTH AND ALL THE BIRDS OF THE AIR AND ALL THE CREATURES THAT MOVE ON THE GROUND-EVERYTHING THAT HAS BREATH OF LIFE IN IT- I GIVE EVERY GREEN PLANT FOR FOOD. AND IT WAS SO”

ACCORDING TO THIS PASSAGE ALL ANIMALS/DINOSAURS WERE HERBIVORES. AGAIN IT SPEAKS IN ABSOLUTE TERMS USING WORDS LIKE “ALL” , “EVERY” AND “EVERYTHING” LEAVING NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION. OBVIOUSLY MANY DINOSAURS WERE CARNIVORES, SOME, SUCH AS T-REX EXCLUSIVELY. MANY MODERN ANIMALS ARE CARNIVORES AND OMNIVORES AS WELL.

As far as I know, there weren't that many carnivors that had humans on their menus in Mesopotamia, though I may be mistaken.


May I reccomend, since you have so many questions, you get a study Bible? Since you're going to be reading Genesis, I reccomend a Jewish Study Bible (in fact, there's one such Bible by that very name.)

Another one is the one I quoted above, "Commentary on the Torah" by Richard Elliot Friedman.

The final one I'll recomend is "The Five Books of Moses" by Robtert Altar.

 

[Rakhel]

May I reccomend, since you have so many questions, you get a study Bible? Since you're going to be reading Genesis, I reccomend a Jewish Study Bible (in fact, there's one such Bible by that very name.)

Another one is the one I quoted above, "Commentary on the Torah" by Richard Elliot Friedman.

The final one I'll recomend is "The Five Books of Moses" by Robtert Altar.

If I may throw my two cents in.
I would also suggest, along with the above, The Complete Tanakh with Rashi. You can buy it from JudaicaPress or find it on line at The Complete Tanach with Rashi - Classic Texts - Torah - Bible .

The Tanakh is first half of the Christian bible. Rashi is one of our wise men who sat down and deciphered the books. If you use this and want his commentary, remember to check the box in the upper right corner of the page.

The second half you'll have to find elsewhere.

 

[gnostic]

im having trouble understanding how the creation story is a parable or symbolic.

either it is true or false. did those things happen or not? if we are going to say that genesis 1 and 2 did not really happen, then what about the rest of the bible?

if some christians are saying the whole snake selling eve a fruit thing did not really happen, then what about moses parting the sea, pharaoh and the plagues? jesus walking on water and healing the sick. is it all just a parable? all symbolic?

Again, I have asked the same questions at RF in previous threads.

jesus walking on water and healing the sick.

Don't forget the most important ones.

Was there ever resurrection or is that a parable?

And is the eternal life in heaven a parable or is it real?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The questions are naive. There's nothing wrong with naive questions so long as they serve as an impulse to study. The preeminent entry-level text is

Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (The JPS Torah Commentary Series)​

My recommendation: get the book and get rid of the caps ...

 

[OmarKhayyam]

All this "it is impossible because" stuff is wasted energy. For the true believer it is a miracle. No more no less. God made the whole thing. He can make plants live w/o light. He can call a day anything he wants and it IS a day cause he's GOD!. The fact that we can't understand proves it was/is a miracle. If we understood we would BE god. The more "impossible" it is the more that proves Goddidit. Just like the flood. Science says it didn't happen. See how limited man's science is. Of course man's science can't explain the flood or the Red Sea or the sun standing still. It cain't and won't EVER. It's a MIRACLE.

To even attempt to apply "science" to what god has done is both foolish and arrogant. Science can't explain it and never will. "Cause it ain't science. It's god's work and he ain't got no science."

See how easy that was.

 

[CarlinKnew]

im having trouble understanding how the creation story is a parable or symbolic.

either it is true or false. did those things happen or not? if we are going to say that genesis 1 and 2 did not really happen, then what about the rest of the bible?

if some christians are saying the whole snake selling eve a fruit thing did not really happen, then what about moses parting the sea, pharaoh and the plagues? jesus walking on water and healing the sick. is it all just a parable? all symbolic?

how do we know what is truth and what is fiction?

I started a thread on this very topic. Don't expect a logical answer, there isn't one. They choose which is literal and which is metaphorical based on tradition and convenience.

 

[Dunemeister]

I started a thread on this very topic. Don't expect a logical answer, there isn't one. They choose which is literal and which is metaphorical based on tradition and convenience.

That may be true for some people. But for others, there are sound exegetical reasons to think some stories are "journalistically" true, whereas others are not. The poetical devices in Genesis make it quite clear that the original author was crafting a poetic theological treatise designed to contradict contemporary theologies.

The New Testament stories about Jesus' resurrection, on the other hand, are intended to be taken as more or less journalistically true. However the accounts vary, the point is the same: a really dead Jesus really resurrected. Although the writers may have been wrong about their interpretation of the Easter events, there can be no doubt that the gospels are intending to write factual history. They say so in their prologues or epilogues (especially Luke and John) or imply throughout by their form (all the gospels take a biographical form).

This analysis of mine is necessarily overly brief due to medium constraints, but if you actually read the critical literature rather than blogs or fora like this, you will find that there really are reasons (some good, some bad) for making these distinctions that go beyond "convenience."

 

[tomasortega]

The questions are naive. There's nothing wrong with naive questions so long as they serve as an impulse to study. The preeminent entry-level text is

Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (The JPS Torah Commentary Series)
​

My recommendation: get the book and get rid of the caps ...

the questions are naive because they are mere reflections of scripture, which is naive itself. the questions simply point out the naivity and fallacy of scripture.


and thanks , but i have better things to do than read yet another biased judao or christian book containing some guys one sided interpretation of the bible. i just wish there were a truly neutral author out there without an agenda to push

 

[sojourner]

FIRST, HOW CAN THERE BE EVENING AND MORNING FOR THE FIRST THREE “DAYS” OF CREATION WHEN THE SUN AND MOON ARE ONLY CREATED ON THE FOURTH DAY? THE VERY DEFINITION OF MORNING/EVENING IS COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON THE SUN “RISING/SETTING”.

SECOND, LIFE OR VEGETATION IS IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT THE SUN, WHICH GENESIS 1: 12, 13 CONTRADICTS, CLAIMING VEGETATION EXISTED BEFORE THE SUN. THE BIBLE DESCRIBES THE SUN’S ROLE OR FUNCTION AS SIMPLY MARKING/GOVERNING THE DAY AND NOTHING ELSE.

THIRD, THE MOON IS DESCRIBED AS A SECOND AND INDEPENDENT LIGHT DEDICATED TO MARKING/GOVERNING THE NIGHT. GENESIS 1: 16 CLAIMS GOD CREATED TWO GREAT LIGHTS WHEN IN FACT THE MOON IS NOT A LIGHT EMITTING PLANET, THE MOON SIMPLY REFLECTS THE SUN’S LIGHT, SO TO SAY THAT GOD MADE TWO GREAT LIGHTS IS INCORRECT. THERE IS ONLY ONE LIGHT, THE SUN.

In the view of the authors, light comes from God. It does not emanate from the sun. Therefore, the plants' growth, day and night, are all independent of the sun. The sun and moon are only indicators, for the authors.

WHO DID GOD SPEAK TO WHEN HE ASKED FOR LIGHT? WHO DID GOD SUBMIT HIS ORDER OR COMMAND TO?

To creation, itself.

WHY DOES AN OMNISCIENT BEING NEED TO ANALYZE AND DECIDE WETHER OR NOT HIS/HER CREATION IS ANY GOOD WHEN HIS/HER OMNISCIENCE SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR THIS KNOWLEDGE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

God doesn't analyze. God declares.

SO, ON THE FIRST DAY GOD SEPARATES LIGHT FROM DARKNESS ALL BY HIMSELF, AND THEN ON THE FOURTH DAY HE CREATES THE SUN AND MOON TO SEPARATE LIGHT FROM DARKNESS AGAIN?

Again, the sun and moon are indicators.

IT IS CLEAR THAT WHOEVER AUTHORED GENESIS WORKED OFF OF THE ANCIENT CONCEPT THAT PLANET EARTH IS THE CENTER AND SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE UNIVERSE, AND THAT EVERYTHING REVOLVED AROUND IT.

And what's the problem with ancient authors thinking like...ancients?

ANOTHER SIGN THE BIBLE STORIES WERE INVENTED BY AVERAGE, UNINSPIRED HUMANS LIMITED TO THE KNOWLEDGE AND REASON OF THEIR TIME AND CULTURE, IS THE CLAIM IN GENESIS 1:17 “GOD SET THEM IN THE EXPANSE OF THE SKY TO GIVE LIGHT ON THE EARTH.”

"Average" I think you can maintain, but "uninspired?" No. Did you think that the Biblical writers should be "Mr. Incredible?"

HOW COULD EARLY HUMANS SUBDUE AND RULE OVER ALL THE ANIMALS ON EARTH? ESPECIALLY IN THE BEGINNING WHEN HUMANS WERE FEW, HECK HOW DID ADAM AND EVE SURVIVE AMONG ALL THOSE WILD ANIMALS IN THE FIRST PLACE? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AVERAGE 150-200LBS HUMAN BEINGS HERE WITHOUT FIREARMS OR ANY OTHER SOPHISTICATED WEAPONS, UP AGAINST TIGERS, LIONS, BEARS ETC. BUT THAT’S JUST SPEAKING MODERN ANIMALS. WE HAVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF DINOSAURS. SO HOW EXACTLY DID ADAM SUBDUE AND RULE OVER GIANT FLESH EATING MONSTERS LIKE T-REX? SHARP STICKS? BOW AND ARROW? GOOD LUCK. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE HUMAN SPECIES TO EVEN SURVIVE UNLESS ADAM AND EVE WERE THEMSELFES GIANT APE LIKE BEASTS ABLE TO PHYSICALLY DEFEND THEMSELFES. BUT THAT WOULD MEAN THE HUMAN SPECIES EVOLVED INTO MODERN HUMANS SINCE THEN WHICH WOULD VALIDATE EVOLUTION, AND GOD KNOWS WE DON’T WANT THAT.

Oh, aren't we the enlightened one! Dinosaurs disappeared a long, long, long time before the human species arose.
And you're assuming that Adam and Eve were real human beings, and not literary devices, used by the authors, to make a theological point. Wonderful job!

SO WHICH IS THE CORRECT VERSION?

Why does it matter? Both present valid theological points.

ACCORDING TO THIS PASSAGE ALL ANIMALS/DINOSAURS WERE HERBIVORES. AGAIN IT SPEAKS IN ABSOLUTE TERMS USING WORDS LIKE “ALL” , “EVERY” AND “EVERYTHING” LEAVING NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION. OBVIOUSLY MANY DINOSAURS WERE CARNIVORES, SOME, SUCH AS T-REX EXCLUSIVELY. MANY MODERN ANIMALS ARE CARNIVORES AND OMNIVORES AS WELL.

You really are new to this, aren't you! Has it ever entered your head that the Bible was never intended to be either a history text or a science text?

Your post is a huge waste of time and space. When you decide you want to stop making fun of something that is important to a lot of people here, and bring up something worth actually debating, let us know.

 

[Riverwolf]

the questions are naive because they are mere reflections of scripture, which is naive itself. the questions simply point out the naivity and fallacy of scripture.


and thanks , but i have better things to do than read yet another biased judao or christian book containing some guys one sided interpretation of the bible. i just wish there were a truly neutral author out there without an agenda to push

May I direct you to Robert Alter or Richard Elliot Friedman?

I'm not even sure if they're Jewish, but they've translated and commentated on the Torah very well.

And the JPS commentary is based on scholarly research, not religious bias. Maybe you should READ a commentary before jumping to the conclusion that it's biased. You can't judge a book by its cover, right?

 

[sojourner]

if some christians are saying the whole snake selling eve a fruit thing did not really happen, then what about moses parting the sea, pharaoh and the plagues? jesus walking on water and healing the sick. is it all just a parable? all symbolic?

Much of it is.

how do we know what is truth and what is fiction?

Truth and Fiction are not opposites. Fact and fiction are opposites. The Bible witnesses to Truth. Often, it does so through allegory and metaphor, which, though not factual, are truthful.