|
|
Post by computergeek on Jun 22, 2006 18:11:59 GMT -8
Hello all,
If this is in the wrong section I am sorry but I have a question about the story of creation in the book of Genesis. In your opinion is it six 24 hour days or could it be the "Divine year" which from what I understand is about 2.5 billion years each and that life was not created until the fourth divine year and that spiritless humanoids walked the earth. I have also read that the creation of Adam on the sixth day was actually when his spirit was breathed in him that he was the first humanoid that had a spirit.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jun 23, 2006 5:43:38 GMT -8
Somehow, for me "the evening and the morning were the first (through sixth) day" makes a pretty clear explanation of what kind of day was being described. The six day creation is described as six literal days in Exodus 20:11 and Exodus 31:17. It's important that we interpret Scripture n a consistent manner that is true to itself. Other hypothesis that suggest the world is much older actually fall apart under scientific scrutiny. A couple of books that I recommend on the subject are "From Goo To You By Way of the Zoo" by Hank Hill (ISBN 0-88270-140-1), "It Couldn't Just Happen" by Lawrence O. Richards (ISBN 0-8499-3583-0) and "Unlocking the Mysteries of Creation" by Dennis R. Petersen (ISBN 0-89051-371-6). The cheapest way I've found to buy books is through www.bookfinder.com . Another good resource for considering our origins is the Institute for Creation Research at www.icr.org An article that touches on what you are referring to is www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=479 |
|
|
|
Post by computergeek on Jun 23, 2006 7:22:27 GMT -8
I do tend to agree with you on the 24 hours as being a day in Genesis but I have also read that the creation story is more poetic than trying to give details about creation. I have read a paper written by a man with the last name of Schroeder who also talks about creation from our perspective as being billions of years but, from G_D's being just days. If I am permitted I will post a link to that article. He has allot of interesting theories about this.
Please understand that I am not putting into question that G_D created everything I just am interested in the different theories about it. This is actually what got me started studying things from a Jewish perspective
I will read the articles you have posted, Thanks for your reply
David
|
|
|
|
Post by Nachshon on Jun 23, 2006 7:37:51 GMT -8
First, Science really doesn't allow for billions of years, but if we want to look at this strictly from a Scriptural point of view, there are two very interesting things that we see in Genesis 1-2. First, they're in a Hebrew tense called the past progressive. It's the story-telling tense, if you will. it indicates sequentiality, and cognisance. There is no break in this tense. There is no place for the story to switch from a cosmic way of telling time to an earthly way. So you would have to accept this cosmic time-scheme throughout the book of Genesis.
Second, look at the first word, just the first word, "B'reshit" more specifically "reshit." It means "first" but more importantly, "firstfruits." (Gen. 49:3, Lev. 2:12, Lev. 23:10, etc.) So what I believe we have here is a refference to the feast of Firstfruits, so it's "At Firstfruits" rather than "In the beginning."
This troubled me when I first realised it, because Firstfruits is the third feast of the year. Shouldn't Passover be first? It is. See Revelation 13:8.
Shalom,
David
|
|
|
|
Post by computergeek on Jun 23, 2006 8:40:20 GMT -8
First, Science really doesn't allow for billions of years, but if we want to look at this strictly from a Scriptural point of view, there are two very interesting things that we see in Genesis 1-2. First, they're in a Hebrew tense called the past progressive. It's the story-telling tense, if you will. it indicates sequentiality, and cognisance. There is no break in this tense. There is no place for the story to switch from a cosmic way of telling time to an earthly way. So you would have to accept this cosmic time-scheme throughout the book of Genesis. Second, look at the first word, just the first word, "B'reshit" more specifically "reshit." It means "first" but more importantly, "firstfruits." (Gen. 49:3, Lev. 2:12, Lev. 23:10, etc.) So what I believe we have here is a refference to the feast of Firstfruits, so it's "At Firstfruits" rather than "In the beginning." This troubled me when I first realised it, because Firstfruits is the third feast of the year. Shouldn't Passover be first? It is. See Revelation 13:8. Shalom, David Could you please give me a little more information about this firstfruits? I am not sure what you are trying to say, please forgive my ignorance  Thanks David |
|
|
|
Post by Nachshon on Jun 23, 2006 9:08:59 GMT -8
I'm sorry, I hadn't realized that I wasn't very clear on that, was I?  If creation was "at Firstfruits" then this puts it, very clearly, in real time. Shalom, David |
|
|
|
Post by computergeek on Jun 30, 2006 17:31:13 GMT -8
This is the link that I was talking about refering to the article about the creation days. Please let me know what you think. www.geraldschroeder.com/age.htmlThanks David |
|
|
|
Post by Nachshon on Jul 4, 2006 11:42:48 GMT -8
I wasn't able to read the whole article, but he slipped up in the first paragraph when he says that scientific data indicates that the world is billions of years old. I highly reccomend "Refuting Evolution" by Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D.
Shalom,
David
|
|
If creation was "at Firstfruits" then this puts it, very clearly, in real time.
