Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
David Henson

Genesis Chapter 1

71 posts in this topic

The numbers in brackets correspond to the verse numbers in Genesis Chapter 1.

[1] The Hebrew verb consists of two different states. The perfect state indicates an action which is complete, whereas the imperfect state indicates a continuous or incomplete action.

At Genesis 1:1 the word bara, translated as created, is in the perfect state, which means that at this point the creation of the heavens and the Earth were completed. Later, as in verse 16 the Hebrew word asah, translated as made, is used, which is in the imperfect state, indicating continuous action. The heavens and Earth were created in verse 1 and an indeterminate time later they were being prepared for habitation, much the same as a bed is manufactured (complete) and made (continuous) afterwards.

[2] The planet was a water planet, waste and empty, meaning that there was no productive land. Though the sun and moon as part of the heavens were complete, at this point light had not penetrated to the surface of the Earth. Job 38:4, 9 refers to a "swaddling band" around the Earth in the early stages of creation. Likely there was a cosmic dust cloud of vapor and debris which prevented the light from the sun from being visible on the surface of the earth.

The Hebrew word ruach, translated as spirit, indicates any invisible active force. Wind, breath, or mental inclination, for example. The Holy Spirit is Jehovah God's active force. Invisible to man but producing results. Throughout scripture it is often referred to as God's hands or fingers in a metaphorical sense. (Psalm 8:3; 19:1)

[3] Here the Hebrew verb waiyomer (proceeded to say) is in the imperfect state indicating progressive action. This first chapter of Genesis has more than 40 cases of the imperfect state. The creative "days" were a gradual process of making Earth habitable.

The light was a diffused light which gradually grew in intensity. Some translations more clearly indicate the progressive action:

A Distinctive Translation of Genesis by J.W. Watts (1963): "Afterward God proceeded to say, 'Let there be light'; and gradually light came into existence."

Benjamin Wills Newton's translation (1888): "And God proceeded to say [future], Let Light become to be, and Light proceeded to become to be [future]."

The Hebrew word for light, ohr, is used. This distinguishes the light from the source of the light. Later, on the fourth "day" the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying that the source of the light only becomes visible then through the swaddling band.

[4] Light and darkness is divided between the eastern and western hemispheres as the Earth rotates on its axis.

[5]Here the Hebrew word yohm translated day, indicates the daylight hours, but the term will be applied in the following verses to indicate various lengths of time. The word is used to describe any period of time from a few hours to thousands of years. (Zechariah 14:8 / Proverbs 25:13 / Psalm 90:4 / Isaiah 49:8 / Matthew 10:15)

The terms evening and morning are metaphoric. At this point there are no witnesses on Earth to a literal night and day, but there are witnesses in heaven. (Job 38:4, 7) The evening symbolizes the period of time in which the events unfolding were indiscernible to the angels in heaven. The morning symbolizes the period in which the angels could distinguish what had been accomplished. (Proverbs 4:18)

[6] The word expanse is translated from the Hebrew raqia, which means "spreading out." Since the root word from which raqia comes is raqa, which is sometimes used in a sense of "beating out" some confusion has been caused by the Greek Septuagint translation of raqia as stereoma, which means "firm and solid structure" concluding when the Latin Vulgate used the term firmamentum because, at that time it was thought that there was a metallic dome surrounding the earth with sluice holes from which rain fell.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia states: “But this assumption is in reality based more upon the ideas prevalent in Europe during the Dark Ages than upon any actual statements in the O T.” - Edited by J. Orr, 1960, Vol. I, p. 314. For example, at Job 36:27-28 the water cycle is described without any reference to the Dark Ages understanding of sluice holes.

[7] In verse 6 and 7 part of the water that covers the Earth is lifted to the heavens to form a water canopy surrounding the planet. This canopy was used to flood the earth during the days of Noah. (2 Peter 3:5-6)

[11] The Biblical kind, from the Hebrew leminoh, Greek genos, and Latin genus, differs from the Evolutionist kind. The Biblical "kind" can be defined as divisions in which cross fertility can occur, a boundary between these kinds is drawn where fertilization ceases. Apple trees, for example, don’t produce broccoli, squirrels don’t produce horses.

In biology a kind applies to animals and plants which possess one or more distinctive characteristics, meaning the biological term kind may contain several varieties within a Biblical kind.

[14] The light in verse 14 is different from that in verse 3. In verse 3 the Hebrew word ohr is used, meaning the light from the source. Light in a general sense, whereas the light in verse 14 the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying the source of the light is now visible. See [3]

The sun, moon and stars are set as a sign of the seasons, days and years. A most accurate timepiece. The use of the term “sign” is often mistaken as a reference to astrology, which is incorrect. See What The Bible Says About Astrology and Does The Bible Condemn Astrology?

[16] The Hebrew waiyaas (proceeded to make), from asah, in verse 16 is different than bara (create) in verses 1, 21 and 27. Asah is the imperfect state indicating progressive action. The luminaries as part of the heavens had already been completed in verse 1, but now they were visible on Earth and prepared for their intended use. Asah can mean make, or appoint (Deuteronomy 15:1), establish (2 Samuel 7:11), form (Jeremiah 18:4), or prepare (Genesis 21:8). Also see [1]

[20] The word soul, from the Hebrew nephesh, means "breather." The soul is in the blood, the life itself, of any breathing creature. At Genesis 9:3-4, for example, the Hebrew word nephesh can be translated as life or soul.

[21] Sea monsters, from the Hebrew tanninim, great reptiles. The Hebrew term remes means to creep or move about; an aimless movement. It covers a variety of creatures and distinguishes these animals from domestic or wild birds, beasts and fish.

[24] Cattle; domestic or tame animal (Hebrew behemah).

[25] There are two creation accounts. The first is a chronological account (Genesis 1:1-2:4) and the second is given according to topical relevance. (Genesis 2:5-4:26) They differ in order and are often wrongly thought to contradict one another.

[26] God refers to his son, Christ Jesus in his heavenly pre-human existence. (Genesis 11:7 / Proverbs 8:30 / John 1:3 / Colossians 1:16) Being made in the likeness, image or semblance of God reflects mankind's potential for being like God, possessing his qualities of wisdom, power, righteousness and love.

[27] Too often it is overlooked by selfish, dominating men that woman too were created in God’s image, and thus deserving respect.

[31] God’s creation is good. There is no sickness, disease or slow progression to death. The small area they reside in is a paradise reflective of the potential, and in fact the purpose of growing throughout the entire planet. It isn’t God’s purpose for us to live in sin on Earth and then move on to heaven.

The creative days, each of which may have lasted thousands or even millions of years, and had taken place an indeterminate period of time after the creation was complete in verse one, are not indicative of any speculation regarding the age of the Earth and universe. The Bible simply doesn’t say.

Period 1 - Light; a division between night and day (Genesis 1:3-5)

Period 2 - The Expanse; a division between waters above and beneath. (Genesis 1:6-8)

Period 3 - Dry land and vegetation. (Genesis 1:9-13)

Period 4 - Heavenly luminaries become visible from Earth. (Genesis 1:14-19)

Period 5 - Aquatic and flying creatures. (Genesis 1:20-23)

Period 6 - Land animals and man. (Genesis 1:24-31)is in them, on the earth. And it was so. [11]

Edited by David Henson
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will just start with this and end on this too:

1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

HOAX

IMHO

Edited by freetoroam
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Biblical kind, from the Hebrew leminoh, Greek genos, and Latin genus, differs from the Evolutionist kind. The Biblical "kind" can be defined as divisions in which cross fertility can occur, a boundary between these kinds is drawn where fertilization ceases. Apple trees, for example, don’t produce broccoli, squirrels don’t produce horses.

Does this apply to bats being of the bird kind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this apply to bats being of the bird kind?

Many Bible critics will often make the incorrect assumption that the Bible confuses bats with being birds, and this is not the case. The reasoning behind this incorrect assumption is due to a misunderstanding of Leviticus 11:13-20. We are talking about the implication that science minded atheists, rational thinking people, make regarding the claim that the Bible can not distinguish between birds or fowl, and bats and insects.

Here is a brief lesson in Hebrew that will be of some help. The word used at Leviticus 11:13 is ohph, which is sometimes translated incorrectly as birds, and sometimes as fowl. It is important to note that the English word fowl applied not only to birds, but all winged flying creatures such as insects and bats. So, although the word fowl in translation is accurate it is often misunderstood due to the fact that today the English word fowl is somewhat more limited than it used to be, applying to birds only.

The Hebrew word for bat is ‛ata·leph.

The Hebrew word for flying creature or fowl (as in all flying creatures including birds, bats, and insects) is ‛ohph.

The Hebrew word for birds in general is tsip·pohr′.

The Hebrew word for birds of prey specifically is ‛a′yit.

The Hebrew word she′rets is drawn from a root word that means to "swarm" "or teem." In noun form applies to small creatures to be found in large numbers. (Exodus 8:3 / Psalm 105:30) In scripture it first applies to the initial appearance on the fifth creative day when the waters began to swarm with living souls. Genesis 1:20

Fowl do not swarm in the waters.

The law regarding clean and unclean things demonstrates that the term applies to aquatic creatures (Leviticus 11:10) winged creatures, including bats and insects (Leviticus 11:19-31 / Deuteronomy 14:19) land creatures such as rodents, lizards, chameleons (Leviticus 11:29-31) creatures traveling on their "belly" and multilegged creatures (Leviticus 11:41-44).

The English word fowl is primarily used today to refer to a large or edible bird. The Hebrew term ohph, which is derived from the verb fly, applied to all winged or flying creatures. (Genesis 1:20-22) So the Hebrew (ohph) is not so limited in usage as the English word fowl much like the old English cattle we talked about earlier which is why I am trying to express the importance of translation. Understanding the where and when of it. Cattle not just cows, fowl not just birds.

Fowl could have been used without cause for concern if the eager critical mind were more open to the possibility of it being at fault rather than the words they are trying to figure out. Before you try it - don't blame that on the inspired writers.

The Hebrew ohph (fowl) could be used in place of she′rets (swarming creatures) if it were not for the fact that the area of which we speak regards all of the various creatures given above. Including bats, birds, insects etc.

It isn't about taxonomy it is about language and translation.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, with respect, what is your question for debate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many Bible critics will often make the incorrect assumption that the Bible confuses bats with being birds, and this is not the case.

So why does it put it in the same context as birds?

And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice post David.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why does it put it in the same context as birds?

And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.

Because, as my response to you concluded, fowl, corresponding to the Hebrew word ohph in earlier times meant any flying thing, including insects, birds, bats.

Nice post David.

Thanks OverSword, I appreciate that.

David, with respect, what is your question for debate?

I was under the impression that this forum was primarily for friendly discussion and the other one was for debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that this forum was primarily for friendly discussion and the other one was for debate.

Maybe, but chats good for that. But i respect you would like to keep this as a discussion without outside opinions.

Respect.

carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, but chats good for that. But i respect you would like to keep this as a discussion without outside opinions.

Respect.

carry on.

Not at all. I love to hear outside opinions, and if the rules allow it I'm up for debate. The point of the post is that the earth wasn't created in six literal days, that the Bible gives no indication of the age of the Earth or universe. That the days were not literal in most of the applications in the creation account, that the first "day" didn't begin until an indeterminate time after the creation was complete. That sort of thing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, just wondering what you make of the remarkable similarities between the creation stories of Genesis and the Enuma Elish?

Also what are your thoughts on the remarkable similarities between the Genesis account of paradise and the fall and the Sumerian myth of Ninhursag?

"the origin of this motif is the Sumerian myth in which the goddess Ninhursag created a beautiful garden full of lush vegetation and fruit trees, called Edinu, in Dilmun, the Sumerian earthly Paradise, a place which the Sumerians believed to exist to the east of their own land, beyond the sea. Ninhursag charged Enki, her lover and husband, with controlling the wild animals and tending the garden, but Enki became curious about the garden and his assistant, Adapa, selected seven plants (8 in some version) and offered them to Enki, who ate them. (In other versions of the story[citation needed] he seduced in turn seven generations of the offspring of his divine marriage with Ninhursag). This enraged Ninhursag, and she caused Enki to fall ill. Enki felt pain in his rib, which is a pun in Sumerian, as the word "ti" means both "rib" and "life". The other gods persuaded Ninhursag to relent. Ninhursag then created a new goddess ( 7 or 8 to heal his 7 or 8 ailing organs including his rib) named Ninti, (a name made up of "Nin", or "lady", plus "ti", and which can be translated as both Lady of Living and Lady of the Rib), to cure Enki. Neither Ninhursag nor Ninti are exact parallels of Eve, since both differ from the character. However, given that the pun with rib is present only in Sumerian, linguistic criticism places the Sumerian account as the more ancient and therefore, a possible narrative influence on the Judeo-Christian story of creation.[10]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all. I love to hear outside opinions, and if the rules allow it I'm up for debate. The point of the post is that the earth wasn't created in six literal days, that the Bible gives no indication of the age of the Earth or universe. That the days were not literal in most of the applications in the creation account, that the first "day" didn't begin until an indeterminate time after the creation was complete. That sort of thing.

have read bits of the old testament and was confused with the years they seemed to live back then, what do you think about them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of this changes the fact that:

1) we're looking at ancient literature, AND THAT'S IT

2) although I comend you on the Hebrew, the analysis is ALL taking out os its historical context (2000-800 BC) and its literary context (Babylonian, Sumerian, Egyptian, Canaanite, etc. creation myths)

3) you can't argue ontology or metaphysics from literature

4) the whole ana;ysis or interpretation is presented from the perspective of the reader, what is at stake for the reader, his/her beliefs, etc. and NEGLECTS the texts' author, why he wrote what he did, to whom, and to address what historical, political, and/or religious circumstances --- i.e., elements that I would argue are unavoidable to understanding the text on its own terms and in its own historical and literary contexts.

I have addressed some of these concerns here http://contradictionsinthebible.com/god-creates-the-heavens-and-the-earth/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have read bits of the old testament and was confused with the years they seemed to live back then, what do you think about them?

Genesis 1:6: And God went on to say: “Let an expanse come to be in between the waters and let a dividing occur between the waters and the waters.”

2 Peter 3:5-6: For, according to their wish, this fact escapes their notice, that there were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; and by those [means] the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.

The two verses above are talking about a water vapor canopy that surrounded the Earth until it was used in the flood. With such a vapor the Earth's climate would be much warmer, a tropical climate for the most part. The canopy would also have protected early man from harmful radiation. Notice the lifespan reduced significantly after the flood. It went from late hundreds to 120. The common scientific estimation of life expectancy during the time of King David is 35 to 40 years old. David himself I would trust more than scientific estimation, wrote: "In themselves the days of our years are seventy years; And if because of special mightiness they are eighty years," Psalm 90:10.

Often Genesis 6:3 is mistaken as being a maximum lifespan of 120 years when in fact it was the amount of years from Jehovah announcing there would be a flood and the coming of that flood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this! I need to study it a bit. But check out my post from 2 years ago and let me know if you think the two fit??

http://www.unexplain...pic=212773&st=0

That's an awful lot of material, could you break it down for me and repost the possible similarities?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, just wondering what you make of the remarkable similarities between the creation stories of Genesis and the Enuma Elish?

Also what are your thoughts on the remarkable similarities between the Genesis account of paradise and the fall and the Sumerian myth of Ninhursag?

These and other common threads in mythology are not really that surprising considering the scattering that took place after the tower of Babel.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These and other common threads in mythology are not really that surprising considering the scattering that took place after the tower of Babel.

And when exactly was this "scattering that took place after the tower of Babel." ?

I'm pretty sure that the consensus of reputable Assyriologists would say that these ancient near east texts predate the Pentateuch by some 1,000 years or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will just start with this and end on this too:

1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

HOAX

IMHO

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v322/cell1527/380668_359005554172585_385050637_n.jpg

Edited by HavocWing
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And when exactly was this "scattering that took place after the tower of Babel." ?

I'm pretty sure that the consensus of reputable Assyriologists would say that these ancient near east texts predate the Pentateuch by some 1,000 years or more.

The question is, how do they determine that?

Professor Olmstead: “We may . . . use the Display inscription to fill gaps in the Annals [royal chronicles listing events annually], but it has not the slightest authority when it disagrees with its original . . . Equally serious, is it that they [“display” inscriptions] rarely have a chronological order. . . . That they are to be used with caution is obvious. . . . We have here a regular chronology, and if errors, intentional or otherwise, can sometimes be found, the relative chronology at least is generally correct. . . . But it would be a great mistake to assume that the annals are always trustworthy. Earlier historians have too generally accepted their statements unless they had definite proof of inaccuracy. In the past few years, there has been discovered a mass of new material which we may use for the criticism of the Sargonide documents. . . . Add to this the references in foreign sources such as Hebrew and Babylonian, and we hardly need internal study to convince us that the annals are far from reliable." - Assyrian Historiography, University of Missouri Studies, Social Science Series, Vol. H, pages 5, 6.

Professor D. D. Luckenbill: “One soon discovers that the accurate portrayal of events as they took place, year by year, during the king’s reign, was not the guiding motive of the royal scribes. At times the different campaigns seem to have been shifted about without any apparent reason, but more often it is clear that royal vanity demanded playing fast and loose with historical accuracy.” - Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Vol. I, page 7.

Modern chronologists tend to trust the limmu or eponym lists are without these corruptions but no dates are given in these lists. It is only assumed that each represent a year.

You don't have those sorts of problems with Bible dating. The Jews reported everything accurately, even their most serious flaws and failures. The dates were given and preserved much more carefully.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David himself I would trust more than scientific estimation, wrote: "In themselves the days of our years are seventy years; And if because of special mightiness they are eighty years," Psalm 90:10.

And you would be right David. In life expectancy calculations of ancient societies infants and young children are included in the average. Haveing a fairly high infant mortality in those times, our picture of life expectancy is severely scewed. If a child made it past 5, in most ancient civilizations, their life expectancies jumped tremendously. It wasn't that people died at a much younger age than we do now, it's was simply difficult to get a child out of child hood. People that made it, actually lived close the the ages that we have now, especially if you take out violent deaths, or deaths during child birth. Statistics can be horribly misleading or amazingly Revealing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, I have the Oxford press.... Is there a better translation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is, how do they determine that?

Professor Olmstead: “We may . . . use the Display inscription to fill gaps in the Annals [royal chronicles listing events annually],

Professor D. D. Luckenbill: “One soon discovers that the accurate portrayal of events as they took place, year by year, during the king’s reign, was not the guiding motive of the royal scribes.

I wasn't talking about royal annals, lists of kings, etc., but specifically the Enuma elish.

I don't have access to scholarly databases, but this book by one of the earliest Assyriologists asserts a date of at least 1000 B.C.

This recent article presents several alternatives but they are all in the range 1500 - 1000 B.C.

As for the OT, "Few scholars today doubt that it reached its present form in the Persian period (538-332 BC) "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Testament

p.s. May I ask again, when exactly did this "scattering that took place after the tower of Babel." occur?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking about royal annals, lists of kings, etc., but specifically the Enuma elish.

I don't have access to scholarly databases, but this book by one of the earliest Assyriologists asserts a date of at least 1000 B.C.

This recent article presents several alternatives but they are all in the range 1500 - 1000 B.C.

As for the OT, "Few scholars today doubt that it reached its present form in the Persian period (538-332 BC) "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Testament

p.s. May I ask again, when exactly did this "scattering that took place after the tower of Babel." occur?

Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His very name means "Division," as Genesis 10:25; 11:9 says, "in his days the earth was divided." So sometime during that period. Skarkalisharri, the king of Agade (Accad) mentions restoring a temple tower at Babylon, which suggests it existed prior to his reign.

Edited by David Henson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, I have the Oxford press.... Is there a better translation?

Oxford Press is a publishing company. it has several translations in print. If you are referring to "The New Oxford Annotated Bible", it's just a regular RSV (Revised Standard Version) with some annotations and essays attached (and the Apocrypha).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.