How were the days in the Genesis account to be understood?

[james2ko]

You can verify for yourself that the plants mentioned on creation 'Day 3' do not warrant cross-pollination via insects, for their survival.

Thus...yet another fatal flaw in your 24hr day paradigm.

 

[Bowman]

Balderdash.....

Care to elaborate...?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The scientific method came from Genesis, brother.

Balderdash

 

[Bowman]

Balderdash

Didn't think so...

 

[james2ko]

Ok, maybe not.

But even then, part of the sixth day, is the creation of man. isn't it?

Now having said that, the fact that those generations were created at the same time or day that the earth and heavens were made, i think it would imply that those generations had existed for as long as the earth and heaven existed, isn't it?

The word in Gen 2:4 should have been properly rendered "history" or "account".

and scientifically, the earth existed billions of years or more.
Which Bible also confirms that "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." 1:2

There could have been a huge gap of millions or perhaps billions of years between Gen 1:1 and verse 2. At some point in time between these two verses, the earth and all its life forms were destroyed. This is commonly known as the Gap Theory. Verse 3 commences a description of a re-creation or "renewing" of the earth (Psa 104:30) along with a narrative of 24 hr days of which no humans are mentioned until the sixth day.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

The word in Gen 2:4 should have been properly rendered "history" or "account".

Those damned ignorant translaters. Who let them near a Bible. :slap: Too bad they didn't have you around.

 

[james2ko]

Those damned ignorant translaters. Who let them near a Bible. :slap: Too bad they didn't have you around.

The comment has no relevancy to the topic. Might I remind you:

2)posts that Target a person or group by following them around the forums to attack them. This is Bullying.


​

 

[sandy whitelinger]

The comment has no relevancy to the topic. Might I remind you:

2)posts that Target a person or group by following them around the forums to attack them. This is Bullying.


​

Well excuse me. I'll ignore you from now on. But I am reminded of one of my favorite Bible teachers who said to be careful when someone runs back to the Greek or Hebrew because they are about to tell a lie.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The word in Gen 2:4 should have been properly rendered "history" or "account".

Assuming the correct interpretation is "history" instead of "generations". Even then, the Day 6 includes the creation of human. doesn't it?

And also, whould you say that, each day is 24 hrs? for example day 1, day 2...5 to day 6, is 24 hrs each?

Verse 3 commences a description of a re-creation or "renewing" of the earth (Psa 104:30)

this one is interesting too. thanks

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The actual duration of each 'day' would be available to us through the record of nature.
.

Ok, so, as I understand, you are saying based on science we can find out the duration of each of the 6 days.

So, isn't is the general understanding that Bible says, the first human was created about 6000 yrs ago?

So, would you say, during the 6th day, only Adam and Eve lived, or more than one generation? Because, you are saying each day is more than just 24 hrs and may include many generations??

God's last creative event before ceasing to create.
This is the seventh Day that we are in now...

Ok, So, when would you say, roughly the 6th day started, and ended, then when the 7th day started?

 

[Bowman]

Ok, so, as I understand, you are saying based on science we can find out the duration of each of the 6 days.

Correct.

This is merely special and general revelation from God.

They should compliment each other.....using each one to understand the other...

So, isn't is the general understanding that Bible says, the first human was created about 6000 yrs ago?

No.

This figure comes from attempts at adding the Biblical genealogies - of which, were never meant to be summed, and also contain provable gaps in them.

So, would you say, during the 6th day, only Adam and Eve lived, or more than one generation? Because, you are saying each day is more than just 24 hrs and may include many generations??

The creation of man and woman was the crowning creative act of God, on creation 'day 6'.

Since then, God has ceased to create, as we are all in His 'day' of creative rest even now...

The 'generations' described after 'day 6' include the vast amount of time that elapsed in all the creation days up to the seventh day.

Ok, So, when would you say, roughly the 6th day started, and ended, then when the 7th day started?

The latest rna/dna data gives a date for humanity at circa 50K-200K years.

Thus, this is how long the seventh day has been thus far...tens of thousands of years long...

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So, what about this verse:

1:6 "And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters
from the waters."

firmament usually means sky according to dictionaries.
How could "the sky" be in the middle of waters?
I mean, if on the surface of earth, there was full of water, and imagine the earth was round? or flat or whatever shape. Then how can "the sky" devide those waters?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Correct.

They should compliment each other.....using each one to understand the other...

Agreed, there must be harmony between religion and science.

Ok, Now, going back to the 2nd day and the 3rd day.

during the 2nd day, there was no plants or trees or fruits, right?

during the 3rd day the trees were created and gave fruits.

So, the duration of the 3rd day must have been more than 24 hrs.

Because, from science and logic, the trees don't give fruit but gradually.
first, the tree gives blossoms, then gradually the blossoms turn to fruits. right?

and the process of ‘bearing fruits’ was during the 3rd day, when the light of the sun had not arrived to earth yet. right?

So, how could these trees during the 3rd day bear fruits when the light had not reached the earth? Light is nessasary for trees to survive and bear fruits.

 

[james2ko]

Assuming the correct interpretation is "history" instead of "generations". Even then, the Day 6 includes the creation of human. doesn't it?

And also, whould you say that, each day is 24 hrs? for example day 1, day 2...5 to day 6, is 24 hrs each?

Gen 2:4 is just a recap and elaboration of the initial re-creation of Gen 1:3 forward which were 6- 24hr periods. Not a separate or additional sequence of events.

this one is interesting too. thanks

You're very welcome. Some religionists include Gen 1:1 with the rest of the re-creation account beginning in verse three. This is where the debate of the Old and New earth originates. But scriptural evidence proves they were two separate events. Hence both theories actually compliment not contradict each other!

 

[Bowman]

So, what about this verse:

1:6 "And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters
from the waters."

firmament usually means sky according to dictionaries.
How could "the sky" be in the middle of waters?
I mean, if on the surface of earth, there was full of water, and imagine the earth was round? or flat or whatever shape. Then how can "the sky" devide those waters?

ווַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, יְהִי רָקִיעַ בְּתוֹךְהַמָּיִם, וִיהִי מַבְדִּיל, בֵּין מַיִם לָמָיִם.

1.6 Vayomer Elohim yehi rakia betoch hamayim vihi mavdil bein mayim lamayim.

And said God, Let be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it (be) dividing between waters (and) the waters.



Strong’s #H7549 “rakia” identifies God’s heavenly expanse. The Mosaic account of creation uses this term interchangeably for “on the face of the expanse of the heavens.” in which birds fly (Genesis 1.20) i.e. the atmosphere, and that farther expanse of sky which God placed “the lights….for signs and seasons” (vv.14, 17, referring apparently to their becoming visible through the cloud cover.

The former receives greater emphasis, particularly during that period before the second day, when the earth cooled sufficiently to permit surface waters, separated from what must still have been a massive cloud-bank above, by the atmospheric expanse (Gen 1.6-8).

Reference:

TWOT
Harris, Archer, Waltke
Page 862

 

[Bowman]

Agreed, there must be harmony between religion and science.

This we can both agree upon...

Ok, Now, going back to the 2nd day and the 3rd day.

during the 2nd day, there was no plants or trees or fruits, right?

Correct.

during the 3rd day the trees were created and gave fruits.

Correct.

So, the duration of the 3rd day must have been more than 24 hrs.

Because, from science and logic, the trees don't give fruit but gradually.
first, the tree gives blossoms, then gradually the blossoms turn to fruits. right?

This is a great observation, of which I concur....

and the process of ‘bearing fruits’ was during the 3rd day, when the light of the sun had not arrived to earth yet. right?

So, how could these trees during the 3rd day bear fruits when the light had not reached the earth? Light is nessasary for trees to survive and bear fruits.

Light was already making its way to the surface of the earth, as described in 'Day 1'....

“Day” One: Genesis 1.1 – 1.5


In the beginningcreated God the heavens and the earth; and the earth was without form and empty, and darkness on the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was brooding on the face of the waters. Then said God, Let be light and was light. And saw God the light that good (it was) and separated God between the light and the darkness. And called God the light Day. And the darkness He called Night; and was the mixing and was the breaking forth time one.


Here we are told the vantage point of the Genesis narrative...i.e. the surface of the waters of earth (and the Trinity as well).

God then commands light to be seen from the surface of the earth's waters.

So...we have light already shining upon the surface of the earth - even though it is covered with water at this early stage.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Light was already making its way to the surface of the earth, as described in 'Day 1'....
covered with water at this early stage.

I agree.

Ok, So, you are saying that from day one, light and water was already on earth, which were nesassary for the trees, and grass, ...etc. and there must have been already day and night as well, as verse 5 says.

if the light was already there, why during the 'event' of the day 4, it is saying that:

1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 1:17 And God set
them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 1:20

 

[InvestigateTruth]

“rakia” identifies God’s heavenly expanse. The Mosaic account of creation uses this term interchangeably for “on the face of the expanse of the heavens.”

Ok, so, you are saying the word rakia would mean an "expansion" between waters. Like placing a dry land between them, or mountain between them. right?

I don't know hebrew, but isn't the same word is used in verse 1:7 and 1:8?
1:7 "And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven."

So, seems like the verse says, God called the firmament(rakia), heaven or sky. So, seems like what is meant by rakia is sky or heaven. otherwise how would we interpret 1:7?

 

[Bowman]

I agree.

Ok, So, you are saying that from day one, light and water was already on earth, which were nesassary for the trees, and grass, ...etc. and there must have been already day and night as well, as verse 5 says.

That's correct.

We can interpret the evening and morning as the earth rotating upon its axis about the already created sun.

if the light was already there, why during the 'event' of the day 4, it is saying that:

1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 1:17 And God set
them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 1:20

The creation verbs employed on this day are different than on 'day 1'.

They signify that the atmosphere became totally transparent - such that the passage of time could observed from the surface of the earth, and prepared the way for higher forms of life (which were to follow) and allowed regulation for their biological clocks.

 

[Bowman]

Ok, so, you are saying the word rakia would mean an "expansion" between waters. Like placing a dry land between them, or mountain between them. right?

This would simply mean that the earth's atmosphere was created...even though the earth was still covered with water during this time...

'Day 3' is where dry land first appeared.

I don't know hebrew, but isn't the same word is used in verse 1:7 and 1:8?
1:7 "And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven."

So, seems like the verse says, God called the firmament(rakia), heaven or sky. So, seems like what is meant by rakia is sky or heaven. otherwise how would we interpret 1:7?

Yes...it would relate to earth's atmosphere...