- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
29 Mar 10
Originally posted by ich binimKopfweg🙂
back of an envelope??? I'm good, but not that good!
😀
No, as you know, I meant jaywill's argument.
If you want an explanation of dinosaurs or the age of the earth, ask scientists. If you want to know how these explanations are compatible with the bible, just reflect on the fact that a wide range of mutually incompatible things have been reconciled with the text by theologians.
29 Mar 10
Originally posted by ich binimKopfweg======================================
I don't have a bible to hand and I can't remember the quotes but weren't animals created after Man??? Surely then this is a contradiction of what you're saying as there were animals before man?
😀
I don't have a bible to hand and I can't remember the quotes but weren't animals created after Man??? Surely then this is a contradiction of what you're saying as there were animals before man?
====================================
As I read the first chatper of Genesis I see that animals under Adam's dominion as created before Adam on the sixth day.
As I read Genesis chapter two I see animals created after Adam is formed. However, I think this could be just a matter of a difference in emphasis and intention of that writing.
Whether chronologically created before or after both chapters agree on one thing. At the top of this system of living things stands human beings. Man is unique among all the lives created on the earth.
The real question I think you mean is "Could there be dinosaurs as animals long before the creation of man ? " That is what some Christian brothers do not agree about.
Genesis says that Noah built the ark using pitch (Gen. 6:14). I believe that this is tar. And it is formed by compressed and ancient vegetation. The implication is that by Noah's time in the early history of man there already was the remains of some ancient vegetation in the earth.
If the remains of pre-Adamic vegetation was in the earth why not the remains of pre-Adamic animals also as fossils ?
The second verse of Genesis 1 has been understood by Hebrew readers to indicate the destruction of a previous world - "and the earth became waste and emptiness ..." (RcV).
Objections are made on linquistic grounds. However, the understanding predates the invention of geology. Some 2nd century AD readers who did understand a destruction / reconstruction view of Genesis had no reason try to accomodate Genesis to modern theories of an earth which required billions of years for its history.
Some readers simply read God's judgment on a previous world in Genesis 1:2. I agree with this understanding at this time. And hints of such a pre-Adamic judgment occur elsewhere in the revelation of the Bible.
It is not the case that all early things are only located in the book of Genesis. As it serves God's need to reveal something related to His His plan for man, He can reveal details of early things in other books which are not mentioned in Genesis.
- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
29 Mar 10
Originally posted by jaywillOoh, you got a large letter one 🙂
[b]======================================
I don't have a bible to hand and I can't remember the quotes but weren't animals created after Man??? Surely then this is a contradiction of what you're saying as there were animals before man?
====================================
As I read the first chatper of Genesis I see that animals under ...[text shortened]... an reveal details of early things in other books which are not mentioned in Genesis.[/b]
30 Mar 10
hey everyone! this is peoples opinion so don't knock it! Othewise I shall have send all the bad weather to you!
😀
jaywill - from what you said about difference of emphasis and interpretation that alone flags up an inconsistency so this leads me to believe there are others??????
(not being argumentative just adding to the points!)
😀
01 Apr 10
2 edits
Originally posted by ich binimKopfwegWhat I wrote was this:
hey everyone! this is peoples opinion so don't knock it! Othewise I shall have send all the bad weather to you!
😀
jaywill - from what you said about difference of emphasis and interpretation that alone flags up an inconsistency so this leads me to believe there are others??????
(not being argumentative just adding to the points!)
😀
" As I read Genesis chapter two I see animals created after Adam is formed. However, I think this could be just a matter of a difference in emphasis and intention of that writing. "
In Genesis 1 we see the creatures created on the days previous to man's creation.
In Genesis two we read this:
"And Jehovah God planted a garden in Eden, in the east; and there He put the man whom He had formed." (verse 8)
" And Jehovah God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and to keep it." (verse (15)
Then we see this mention of the animals:
"And Jehovah God formed from the ground every animal of the field and every bird of heaven, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the name called any living animal, that was its name." (v. 19)
It is quite likely that versee 19 is not intended to be understood chronologically but generally. If so there would be no inconsistency just a difference in emphasis between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2.
It could mean that generally the animals had been created from the ground and brought to Adam after he had been created to name them.
The 1000 fold consistencies in the 66 Biblebooks seem to impress this reader more than this matter. I mean we are talking about a book whose writing ctook some 40 authors over 1500 or 1600 years.
01 Apr 10
Originally posted by jaywillok, I'm now going to ask a really stupid question which you shall laugh at but I haven't looked into this.
What I wrote was this:
" As I read Genesis chapter two I see animals created after Adam is formed. However, I think this could be just a matter of a difference in emphasis and intention of that writing. "
In Genesis 1 we see the creatures created on the days previous to man's creation.
In Genesis two we read this:
[b]"And Jehovah God planted a ...[text shortened]... e are talking about a book whose writing ctook some 40 authors over 1500 or 1600 years.
why are there two Genesis'? 😳
I understand what you mean now and there will be slight differences in each interpretation.
😀
02 Apr 10
Originally posted by ich binimKopfweg==================================
ok, I'm now going to ask a really stupid question which you shall laugh at but I haven't looked into this.
why are there two Genesis'? 😳
I understand what you mean now and there will be slight differences in each interpretation.
😀
ok, I'm now going to ask a really stupid question which you shall laugh at but I haven't looked into this.
why are there two Genesis'?
==========================
I do not think it is a really stupid question at all.
Its a good question.
The second revelation starts from Genesis 2:4 and seems a more detailed description of man's creation specifically. Though the first account does say man was created in the image of God the second account goes much deeper. The tripartite nature of man in developed. God formed his body from the dust, breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Therefore we have the physical body, the psychological soul, and the spiritual spirit - a three part man.
The second chapter therefore zeros in more closely on this created man's make up.
There seems also more of a emphasis on man's moral responsibility. In the first chapter we do see man with a mandate to express God's image and excercise God's authority over His creation. But there is not the mention of a covenant between God and man.
Other comments require more time. The book that I need to examine again on this particular question is Mary McDonough's God's Plan of Redemption.
I recall she spoke to this matter of the seemingly two creation accounts. The Scriptures elsewhere use this kind of double scheme. It seems the Holy Spirit's style often to show a double view of an important matter.
Maybe it is a kind of divine stereographic recording.
02 Apr 10
Originally posted by jaywill🙂
[b]==================================
ok, I'm now going to ask a really stupid question which you shall laugh at but I haven't looked into this.
why are there two Genesis'?
==========================
I do not think it is a really stupid question at all.
Its a good question.
The second revelation starts from Genesis 2:4 ...[text shortened]... iew of an important matter.
Maybe it is a kind of divine stereographic recording.[/b]
That makes sense - to clarify the ideas behind the faith and how the human was created - thanks! I will have to think of some other questions to ask now!
😀
06 Apr 10
1 edit
Originally posted by ich binimKopfwegcome back soon, the forum is missing you already, plus i need to scrounge a few more free German lessons 🙂
Goodbye fellow posters! Thanks for all the help and ideas on this thread!
GOODBYE CHESS!
😀
ich binimKopfweg signing out!
19 Apr 10
Originally posted by ich binimKopfwegI would be happy to answer any questions you have on here or E-mail me danielanswers@hotmail.com
I'm quite taken in by religion now and find myself thinging a lot about it.....would love to just ask some questions about some religions e.g. Buddhism, Hinduism, Islamic, Christian/Catholic. These questions will be in no way offensive just inquisitive but I have a lot of unanswered things!
Get back to me and give me a shout if you don't mind bei ...[text shortened]... the idea of being converted ad truly believing, I want to just doesn't all make sense!
😀
21 Apr 10
Originally posted by daniel58oh that's great - thanks! Do you know about everything listed or???? Just to tailor the questions!
I would be happy to answer any questions you have on here or E-mail me danielanswers@hotmail.com
😀
22 Apr 10
Originally posted by ich binimKopfwegI'm sorry I just got back on here after not coming on for some time and didn't have a chance to look at the whole thing, but I can try to answer your questions though
oh that's great - thanks! Do you know about everything listed or???? Just to tailor the questions!
😀