Welcome, ברוך הבא, Welkom, Добро пожаловать, Bienvenue, Bienvenido, 歓迎, υποδοχή

This site is meant to give some insight to scripture. It can be used by anyone for lessons. It is also a place to discuss the issues of the Bible, not the Church. You can leave an anonymous comment if you feel the need. All comments are moderated and all posts will be answered, even the oldest of posts. No requirements are needed.

To discuss church and Christian-life related issues, click here http://ideasoftimreligion.blogspot.com/. Or click on links on side of the page. Please vote on polls.

Sunday, February 23, 2014

(83) In the Beginning: Creation vs Theistic Evolution

Watching the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham was not the most interesting debate in the world, although it was far better than any political debate.  One issue that Bill Nye kept bringing up was if creationism is valid then why do many Christians not believe in it.  Why do some Christians deny a literal Biblical account of creation and accept evolution, either the scientific model or what many call theistic evolution; the idea that God did create but used evolution as the means of getting to the human race.  Both are poppycock.  But Bill Nye is correct.  Many Christians flat out will not believe that evolution is false.  They believe that Jesus is the saviour but believe that the earth is old; proven by science and backed by scripture to be old.  The age of the earth is one of the biggest arguments between the two sides which from here on out will be known as YE (young earth) and OE (old earth).  YE says that the earth is 6000 years old.  OE says that the earth is 13.4 billion years old.
One major issue that causes the disagreement is the issue of the fall of man.  OE believes that death of living organisms have happened from the beginning.  They read into scripture that Genesis is not a literal meaning of creation but is just a modified story of God's evolutionary method.  They claim that the first few verses are actually billions of years and therefore death had to happen because nothing can live for billions of years.  They would also add that there may have been two types of man that had been created.  The first being man-like and that is why we have "neanderthal", "cro-magnon", and "homo erectus".  The second one being Adam.  They use as their foundation the two different stories in Genesis 1:27.
  • 27  So God created humankind in his own image; in the image of God he created him:  male and female he created them.
and Genesis 2:7
  • 7  Then Adonai, God, formed a person from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, so that he became a living being.
But the following explains the flaw in the idea that there were two creations: The Book of Genesis.  Do not misunderstand what these are saying.  There may be two stories but one creation.  When you read the whole passage from Genesis 1 notice it says in the "image" and "likeness", not to be exactly like God (spirit).  This explains that we were not created as spiritual beings without bodily form.  And from the whole passage in Genesis 2 we are actually created as physical beings.  Two stories, one creation.  We were made to interact with the earth with a body that can touch and were given bodily shells to house the same feelings God may have e.g., love in a heart, ideas in a brain, and so forth.  YE believes that death was not part of creation but part of man's choice in the Garden of Eden.  Death only came when man fell.
Here is why YE is more valid if you are a Christian:  Jesus came and died for everyone.  Why did He die?  Because man sinned and needed redemption to find his way back to God.  Man sinned because he showed disobedience to God's word.  Disobedience is what sin is.  If you disobey God, no matter what it is or what YOU believe, it is still sin and needs to be taken care of.  God walked with man (Adam) and talked with man.  He had a personal relationship with Him.  But when man disobeyed the relationship was destroyed.  Death had entered the genome of mankind.  Man's immortality in Paradise was lost.  His bloodline was ruined.  If the earth was old and death entered before sin then sin did not cause death and Genesis is a lie.  But since sin did bring death Jesus was needed to bring man back to God.  Sin brought death, Jesus brings life.  There was no death before man sinned.  Therefore there was no death in the first six days of creation.  So if there no was death in the first six days then these days could not equal 13.4 billion years.

This is not a Lesson about disproving or rejecting science, but evolution theory only.  Science is worthy to use and needed to discover.  But evolution theory in any account is not compatible with creation or reality.

65 comments:

Brenda said...

I believe these two time differences are talking about the difference between carnal man and man born of the Holy Spirit, and can be read in a natural way and discerned in a spiritual way.

Brenda said...

Sorry Tim,
I did not mean the time differences as in billions of years and six thousand years. I meant the time differences as in Genesis ch.2 vs. 5 - 7 where it appears that the man of dust was made before the third day, and Genesis ch1 vs.26 - 31 where it appears that God is speaking to someone else saying let us make mankind (plural)in our image, on the sixth day.

Tim said...

I know what you mean. I have entertained that theory a lot. I also on the same lines have thought that there were two creations, one was spiritual and then later man physically was formed.

Brenda said...

I think the other way around as in the first is physical (earthly), and the second one on the sixth day (as in one day is as a thousand years) where God and Jesus are making the earthly man sons of God, all contained in Jesus, in their image. Eternal life is to know (which is a very intimate word)God and Jesus Christ. As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. I don't know the exact time but I believe we are close to the six thousand years.

tcwilmans said...

Interesting, I hadn't thought thru the spiritual creation vs physical creation..

Tim said...

Brenda,

Could you please elaborate on your idea? Such as: when were these creations? Because it seems like you are saying that on the 6th day man was created spiritually. If that is so when was the physical mankind created? I just wan to make sure I am hearing all you are saying. Thanks for adding to this conversation.

Tim said...

TCWilmans,

I heard that theory about probably 15 years ago. One minister said that is why there are two accounts of creation, one was to show how "man" came into being. And the other was to show how "mankind" came into being. I was heading down that path for awhile but one thing stopped me from believing in it. Both passages say male and female were created. Were both of them made spritually and then Adam was created and then a few days or so later Eve was created? I think the two accounts show a different story as in they are explaining to different reasons for being written. Chapter one would be to show us the beginning of time and how thins were created and then Chapter two expands on how mankind was created.

Some as the post says think the two accounts are both physical but the first one is an ape-man and the second one is where the Spirit of God was breathed into one of these ape-man and became man. I do not see that because man was created from dust not another animal.

Eh...no one really knows but I just don't believe in any evolutionary means. God works spiritually too many times to say that He restricts Himself to natural laws.

Brenda said...

Tim,
I put a post up on my blog on 22/11/2011 trying to explain what I saw in the scriptures regarding this, but I know I have not got the beginning quite right. I believe I can see something more in it but it is very difficult to explain. It involves whether you discern it spiritually or not. If you read the whole of that post you will get the gist of what I am implying but I do not know how to set up a link so you would have to scroll back to read it if you wish to. There is no mention of the fall of Adam in Genesis ch.5 and the descendants are from Seth. The name Seth means ' the appointed', and I believe there is a reason for this and the fact that there is no mention of the fall connected with Adam here. I hope to one day add to this post and maybe put it up again.

Tim said...

For my readers, here is the address for Brenda's post on her blog.

http://lighthousevision.blogspot.com/2011/11/let-us-make-man-in-our-image_22.html

Brenda,
A lot of what you said on your post I would agree with. We definitely have two creations in all of us. We are born physically and reborn spiritually. But I do not think this is the same as the story of creation as your post/blog says. I do believe that all stories in the Bible have a human side and a Godly side. Or as my church has been saying, a lower story and a higher story. But Genesis is just an account of all beginnings. It is meant for us to understand where we came from and why we have to do the things we have to do since man fell. The lower (physical/human) story tells us our beginnings and creates timelines for us and the higher (spiritual/Godly) story is that we can not find God on our own, He provides the way. There is so much more we can say here but for time sake we can take it one at a time if want.

The reason why we only have Seth's genelogy in that section is because it is the only one we need to understand where the Jewish nation came from. Abel is dead. Cain has been removed. Seth's decendants are Adam's decendants too. Adam had many sons and daughters. But Seth is the only one we need to know. There is no mention of the fall because we are quite a few years after fall, up to 130 years later. There is no need to remention it.

Thanks for the info and keep on writing.

Brenda said...

The first man was forbidden to eat from the tree of life Tim. We are told in the Bible that when we are born again the old man is now dead and that we are a new creation. If we are a new creation then the spiritual part was never there in us.

No Doubt said...

Tim,

First of all, good write up.

As we have previously discussed, I'm a firm believer that the evidence of creation and the Word of God cannot lie. They have the same source. They must reconcile with each other. I also believe that when there is conflict, man and religion is normally the problem.

No Doubt said...

Brenda,

Not very many people find the reference to the second or third day specific man creation. God Bless you!

Too many times, people read through B'reshit, Genesis, and zoom past it and continue to interpret, and I say that loosely, the scriptures according to their traditional denomination school of thought rather than be led into the truth by God's Holy Spirit.

Excellent Job!

As a side note:

To insert links into you comments, go to

Commonly Used HTML Codes

They show you the proper syntax and you can cut and paste as you desire.

No Doubt said...

Wow, this discussion takes me back to 2009, when I first wrote about this in my Genesis blog.

As Brenda stated, they are definitely two man creations that occurred during the six days of creation. Adam was created on the second or third day, before "...every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

I'm betting on the third day because of the double blessing, God gave the third day.

Mankind was created on the sixth day.

For a complete explanation, please go to The Beginnings Of Man on my blog.

Two key verses to understanding this is found in the fourth and fifth verses of chapter two.

"...in the day" clearly indicates that what is about to be described happened during the six days of creation.

The plural "Generations" clearly indicate two lines of man being presented during the six day creation period.

What do you do with that?

I believe that God created Adam, a personal friend to God on the third day in order to tend to the Garden of Eden.

On the sixth day, God created mankind. It was somewhere between the third and sixth day, he created Eve.

The Word of God and the Mishna indicates that all of God's creation were originally clothed in light. After the Garden, the effects of the light garments wore off resulting in decreased ages of manking the further we get away from the Garden.

The speed of light is a key part of our present day age calculations.

Could the discrepancy between the ages in the Bible and what we see in science be explained by the difference in our reality from the Garden till now and the resulting slowing down of the Speed of Light?

Tim said...

Brenda,

I am not quite sure if I can think of it that way. Please correct me if I am misunderstanding. Are you saying Adam had the spirit but since he sinned mankind lost the connection to the spirit and when Jesus came we got it back since we are reborn in Him and are a new creation? I don't know about that. David had the spirit of God in him. Prophets of old if you ask me had the spirit of God come upon them to get the prophetic word. They of course were no "born again" as we would understand.

Give me more to ponder...

Tim said...

No Doubt,

I remember this conversation from a long time ago and I thank you for reminding me of this. It took me awhile to get it but I get it!!!

It does go with my idea that Genesis 1 and 2 are separate accounts and that 2 builds on 1.

In case others did not see it: Chapter 1 says that on day three all vegetation was created. But chapter 2 says that before God caused any vegetation to appear that he noticed no one was there to cultivate it, and THEN God made man from the dust. So if He made man from "dust" since there was no vegetation and if all vegeatation was created on day 3 then man (Adam as spirit) was created on day 2 or day 3 and later "mankind" (Adam as physical)was created on day 6.

Neat. Interesting.

Is that what you were saying Brenda?

I like it!!!!!!!!!!

Brenda said...

Hello No Doubt, I shall visit your blog and read that post.

What I see in the scriptures Tim, is that the first man Adam was flesh (he was not allowed to eat from the tree of life), but the second Adam is Spirit (being allowed to 'eat' from the tree of life Jesus. I know that the Spirit motivated the prophets of old but they were not 'born' of the Spirit. This was only granted after Jesus was glorified. When I became born again and part of the church, (and the church is God's Israel),then I could also see the six day creation in a six thousand year timescale where the Adam of the sixth day (both male and female) is not a living being but a life-giving Spirit. I believe that God is saying to Jesus who is seated at His right hand 'Let us make man in our image', because 'eternal life' is to know God and His Son Jesus Christ. We are told that the secret things belong to God but those revealed belong to us. We are also told that knowledge shall be increased in the latter days, and I find the more we seek, the more we find. I have always felt that when I started to be drawn to Jesus I had crumbs of a loaf of bread and I wanted to find the whole loaf. I am not being disrespectful to God saying this as I believe absolutely that Jesus is the Word of God, the bread of life who is the One mediator between man and God, and that God is Spirit.

Paul G said...

Hm, Interesting post and comments.
Yes I have heard the interpretation of the 'two man creation', but I personally do not see it that way.

I see it as one man and one beast creation and not as TWO MAN, although both were male.
One male which is Adam and he is the man (human) who was created in the image of God (Jesus) (Gen. 1:27), the other male was the beast called the serpent who was created in the image of the animal (beast) (Gen. 3:1).
And it was the beast who first was created on the sixth 24 hour day (Gen. 1:24) and after, also on the sixth day God created the first man Adam in His likeness, both in the one day.

The Bible gives us a clear genealogical history in years and generations from Jesus Christ back to Adam (Luke 3), therefore I do not believe in the 13.5 billion years theory.
After all, how do they know that is was 13.5 billion years?
First they used to guess millions of years, but obviously it wasn't good enough, so they increased their deceptions to billions of years.
I'd rather believe the Scriptures than those ignorant speculators.

Brenda, if Adam is the first Adam then who is the second Adam?

As I see, Jesus is the second Adam and He also is the tree of life in Gen.2:9). So Jesus does not eat from the tree of life because He is the tree of life.
Now concerning eating from trees is a metaphor, it doesn't speak about literal eating or literal trees.

Tim, you said, "But when man disobeyed the relationship was destroyed. Death has entered the genome of mankind."

Please tell me, what was their disobedience to warrant death?

Tim said...

Brenda,

Forgive me if I am still misunderstanding. Here is what I am hearing:

You believe that one day = 1000 years to God in sort of a literal way.

So each day of creation is 1000 years each.

The sixth day is when the new Adam came and became a spiritual being or reborn.

So Genesis 1 is basically a spiritual account of existence?

Again, I may be way off but I am really trying to see what you are meaning.

Tim said...

Paul,

So if the beast was created on the 6th day then who was the "us" in verse 1-2? I thought you said the beast had a hand in creation.

"The Bible gives us a clear genealogical history in years and generations from Jesus Christ back to Adam (Luke 3), therefore I do not believe in the 13.5 billion years theory...I'd rather believe the Scriptures than those ignorant speculators."

Same here.

Now concerning eating from trees is a metaphor, it doesn't speak about literal eating or literal trees.

I disagree. If Genesis 6 days are
literal then why all of a sudden is eating not literal? I think it is completely literal. They were told not to do it. And that is where the disobedience comes in. When they decided to eat from the tree they wanted to eat from instead of listening to God and eating from the tree He wanted them to eat from. The same thing we do today. We have God's word but we all choose to go against it.

Brenda said...

Paul,
where did I say that Jesus ate from the tree of life?

Brenda said...

I can only say Tim that I feel there is more than meets the eye, so to speak, in the first and second book of Genesis. I have put what I believe I see in my post which I told you about regarding this, but I know that there are missing parts there. There is also something I believe in the fact that Genesis ch. 5 makes no record of the fall and the fact that only Seth is spoken about whose name means 'appointed' I intend to do a bit more research. As far as the second Adam and the 1000 year timescale is concerned I believe that Jesus, the Son of God, came on the 4th day (the sun being likened to the bridegroom, and Jesus being likened to the bridegroom). He stood up in the temple and said 'Today and tomorrow I do cures, the third day I will be perfected.' If I take that in a 1000 year timescale way Jesus is doing cures by reconciling us back to God for two thousand years? We are told that we are the body and Jesus is the head. Could Jesus have been talking Spiritually here and is He as the head and we as His body being made spiritually alive with Him in this the sixth day, or six thousand years after God began creation. I don't know really. There is a lot that is in my thoughts that have not fully come together yet, and I may be totally wrong. We shall see.

Tim said...

So each day of creation in Genesis 1 is something spiritual and manifests itself into the physical world but separated by 1000 years each?

If that is what you are saying then that is very interesting.

Brenda said...

Yes I do believe this Tim, and I believe there are other examples of the one thousand day time.

Mark ch.14 v.58 says 'We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.’

John ch.2 v.19 says 'Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”(I believe spiritual days)

I believe these two verses are speaking spiritually about we, His temple, which is also concerning a three day growth, as I and all who have fallen asleep in, and are in Chris,t are in that temple.

2 Corinthians ch.2 v.16 says 'What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."

No Doubt said...

Paul,

"The Bible gives us a clear genealogical history in years and generations from Jesus Christ back to Adam (Luke 3), therefore I do not believe in the 13.5 billion years theory."

At the risk of sounding facetious, I can't believe we found something else we agree on. The Scriptures clearly gives us a time span from Adam until Y'shua. However, I believe you misunderstood the 13.5 billion years reference. That is the age of the universe, not the time between Adam and Y'shua.

Could you give some actual scriptural support for your beast/man creation theory?

"And it was the beast who first was created on the sixth 24 hour day (Gen. 1:24) and after, also on the sixth day God created the first man Adam in His likeness, both in the one day."

Could you also give us some scriptural support to your belief that Adam was created on the sixth day? Especially, since the specific Adam creation account, in Genesis two, clearly says it happen just before the plants and herbs were in the field.

Finally, you indicated that"...eating from trees is a metaphor...".

Even though I agree that metaphors are used within the scriptures, however, all metaphors must have a tether to the literal interpretive truth. You can not have just a metaphorical interpretation, it doesn't jive with the example Y'shua gave us. Please!!!! Read it for yourself. Everytime, Y'shua interpreted the scriptures, it was a literal interpretation.

Brenda said...

Hi No doubt,
I have been reading your earlier posts. I particularly liked the one on 'The serpent'. I think the answer we should always give him is 'It is written', as Jesus did in the wilderness. Jesus words to Peter are an excellent example of how He sees the spiritual enemy, and how we too should see him. Peter saw Jesus forthcoming death as a bad thing, not a good thing, because he was looking at it from a human point of view with the carnal mind setting its sight on what was best for the physical.

Brenda said...

Paul,
The spiritually 'reborn' collective in Jesus is the second Adam. You ask 'What did they do to warrant death'. It was to question Gods' word, which many still do, that warranted death (separation from God).

No Doubt said...

Brenda,

"There is also something I believe in the fact that Genesis ch. 5 makes no record of the fall and the fact that only Seth is spoken about whose name means 'appointed' I intend to do a bit more research."

Once again, good catch. All time records within our time-space are post fall. That is where people, who strictly believe in only six thousand years from Adam to the present, are getting themselves in trouble.

The scriptures are not clear on the time between God's day of rest and the fall of Adam and Eve.

In addition, if you add the fact that Yesha'yahu, Isaiah was clear on the fact that God did not create the Earth null and void and an alternate reading to Genesis 2 could be, "...and the Earth became null and void, the time could be millions of years between God creating the Earth in it's original form and when he reformed it at the time of Adam.

Additional scuripture supporting this is the description of when Satan fell. Was this before the garden incident or after?

As a side note, you mentioned Seth's name meaning "appointed". Were you aware of the secret message God gave to us concerning our salvation hidden in the genealogy of Genesis 4? Check it out at these two links.

Secret Message Part One

Secret Message Part Two

Tim said...

Brenda,

I am a complete believer in two separate reasons for everything in the Bible. One is for our spiritual purposes, such as all the OT points to Jesus and all references of the Temple point to us. And then the other one is a real true earthly story that allows us to know and understand our physical being as well.

This post that I have written focuses on the physical. But I appreciate all of our views here to discover like you have implied so much more than what we see only. I like your 1000 year view and I will look more into it as well.

Tim said...

No Doubt,

The more I looked at the scripture of Genesis 2 I can't get past the Garden of Eden placement.

1) I think chapter 2 verses 1-3 should be in chapter 1. (Who made these chapters and verses anyway?)
2) It still seems to be an incomplete narrative like Genesis 1 is. I am reading it as not a whole story. Because it does not mention any other living creation besides man, no beast, no birds, no fish Shrubs are mentioned I believe to make a connection between what the rest of the world had and Paradise.
3) Then it seems to fill in more to the story as in how did man get into Paradise.

So I do not think this is just Day 2 creation. If so, then why not mention more about the rest of the days?

Tim said...

My last comment then leaves an opening to those who believe in an old earth, Eve. WHen was she created if Adam had to name all the animals? We do not know. All we know about Eve is that when ADAM was 130 years old Cain was born. She may not have been created for 100 earth years. That is still compatible with my lesson and that Genesis 1 and 2 are not linear but build upon each other.

Tim said...

When did satan fall? Good question. My personal feelings, no biblical stance, is it was all before creation. When all the angels had fallen then God said to Himself, let's make man in our image, no more angels to be created.

Good discussion from all of you. I hope those who are reading are taking notes and not heads.

Brenda said...

Hi again No doubt and Tim,
If you are referring to satan as Lucifer, I have never seen Lucifer as being satan, as satan was a liar from the beginning and Lucifer means 'light bearer'. I will look up those posts No doubt, and I must come back to really take in what you are both saying regarding the Genesis chapters. Thank you for your interaction.

Tim said...

Brenda here is why I say satan is lucifer. Check out the Satanic Verses at the bottom. I will be moving these to Biblical Lessons soon.

Satan

No Doubt said...

Tim,

I agree that the first three verses of chapter one belongs as one thought with the rest of chapter one. I don't believe in chapters divisions, they get in the way sometimes. However, I do like them for locating things. In the true way God wants us to learn his word, it's all about knowing what's said, not where it's written.

Could you explain a little more about you having an issue with the placement of the garden?

As I see it, chapter one through the first three verses of two is a generalized account, with chapter two, verse four and on, giving a specific account of another line of creation. It says that much when it uses the Hebrew word "elleh" to start chapter two verse four.

Elleh is used to point the reader to a specific incident during the previous account.

A good example of this it to tell about what happen on 911, then following that up with a supporting account of what happen in a small field in Pennsylvania or the Pentagon.

No Doubt said...

Tim,

To your comment as to when Eve was created, it was between the second and sixth day.

In first generalized account, God gives us key time markers.

Using those time markers, in the second account, he says the he created the woman for Adam "...after the herbs and plants" on the third day and before "the plants and the cattle" on the sixth day.

He does mention any other because it is a separate account or line. That what Genesis 2:4 says. These are the "towlĕdah" generations, accounts or contemporaries. The word actually means, "this occured between the beginning and now. It's used to give an linear account of the people or events in a line from the beginning till now.

As for Satan, he fell sometime before the garden and the garden incident. My thoughts are that he fell after the creation of the heavens and the earth but before verse two. It was his fall that precipitated or cause the need to recreate the Earth.

Finally, as I said in a previous comment to Brenda, all time, given in the Bible, is post curse or fall. That opens up a big old can of worms that no one wants to address within mainstream Christianity.

Tim said...

No Doubt,

I think the Garden and all other shrubs and trees are a separate creation. I think He made all fields and stuff and then made the Garden especially for man. After He made it, then He placed man in it to till it. I see the Genesis 2 account as a narrative only explaining how man had Paradise, not about creation itself. That would stil be in conjunction with "elleh"

You say Eve was somewhere between day 2 and 6 but I am not for sure. I know it says at the end that there was male and female but could it be another narrative and not exactly linear? It also says that there was no plants and yet He sent a mist to water it. Why? Water would only have helped the plants. So I see something missing in here. And then man was formed. Then He planted a Garden, not neccessarily "create" but brought forth. What is the verb there? Could you check?

I agree for the most about satan. He was definitely created before man.

Brenda said...

No doubt,
I have just red your two posts on the meanings of the names and found it very interesting. I believe absolutely that God has hidden His messages to us in scripture, and also that salvation is open to everyone that will place their trust in Jesus.

Brenda said...

Hi Tim,
I still can not think that Lucifer is satan because when it talks about the king of Tyre in the beginning of Ezekiel ch. 28 it states that he is a mere mortal. I also think that 'angel' means 'messenger' and we are messengers of light as believers, and I believe much of the church's spiritual state could be likened to this chapter. You only have to look at the catholic church who have an overseer who is called 'holy father'. There is only One who is Holy Father. Also we, the church, are stated as being 'seated in Heavenly places' with Christ Jesus (Ephesians ch.2 v.6), so there is a Spiritual aspect to all of this I believe.
Regarding satan, I believe that he was created evil. Isaiah ch.45 v.7.

Brenda said...

Tim,
if I leave a comment on one of your posts written in 2009 will you be notified of this comment in your e mails and be able to read it or do I leave a comment regarding the 2009 post on this post?

Tim said...

Brenda,

Use your own thinking here. There is a physical story and a spiritual story. King of Tyre is an analogy of satan. He is dressed in splendor but will have a terrible downfall.

And all comments go to my email so I can moderate what is said. So yes your comment will be posted even from a 2009 lesson.

Brenda said...

I have to say that I can see no reference to satan in these verses. It appears to be talking about someone who is man but makes himself out to be like God. We are kings and priests in Jesus and are seated in Heavenly places and Paradise is quoted as being the third heaven in 2 Corinthians ch.2-4. Paul knew a man who was caught up into Paradise and given extra knowledge. I really believe there is a connection here.

No Doubt said...

Tim,

Sorry! I am somewhat confused by your comment.

"I think the Garden and all other shrubs and trees are a separate creation."

If you are saying that they are separate events, isn't that what I said?

Just confused on what you intended to say.

"I see the Genesis 2 account as a narrative only explaining how man had Paradise, not about creation itself. That would stil be in conjunction with "elleh"

I'm not sure how you can shoehorn your explanation of the Genesis 2 account into jiving with the use of "elleh". I just don't see it. Please elaborate.

As for being linear, that's the structure of the Hebrew. It one event happening after another in sequence until chapter 2, verse 4, where the word, "elleh" is used to separate the two accounts.

Also, God "bara",(created out of nothing) man in chapter 1, verse 26, where he "yatsar" (formed out of the dust) Adam in chapter 2, vere 7.

Two different acts. Two different creations.

As for the garden, he "nata" planted trees that he already created in chapter 1, verse 11, the third day.

Finally, the mist reference is one of those time markers as to when he formed Adam. It kinda of vague as to which day, the second or third day.

I could see the second, the day without the blessing because he foreknew of the fall or the third day, the day of double blessing which marked the first day of bringing forth reconciliation.

Tim said...

Brenda,

"I have to say that I can see no reference to satan in these verses. It appears to be talking about someone who is man but makes himself out to be like God."

Yes. That is true. Just like there are Christ-like figures who represent Christ there are satanic figures who represent satan. I think those verses are an analogy of who satan is told to us so we could understand on human terms. Same as what we are saying here about Genesis. There is a physical story and a spiritual story that go together.

By the way I added the satanic verses here on this site as (81) and (82).

Tim said...

No Doubt,

We are saying a lot of the same thing. I think all the vegetation was created on Day 3. And I think the Garden was after the creation of man, even perhaps Day 7 or even into later days. Genesis 2 to me is telling us "okay, we have the creation created, now this is how man was in Paradise, however they are not the same story". Maybe that is just me.

If I am using elleh correctly (and I just learned that word when you said it), the writer is saying that these are two separate stories but a huge connection is there bewteen them. Or as you said it points back to the events written earlier.

Not all writing of the Bible though is linear.

"Also, God "bara",(created out of nothing) man in chapter 1, verse 26, where he "yatsar" (formed out of the dust) Adam in chapter 2, vere 7. Two different acts. Two different creations."

I can see that.

"Finally, the mist reference is one of those time markers as to when he formed Adam. It kinda of vague as to which day, the second or third day."

That vagueness is what I am referring to. It is not completely made known to the exact time. So to me, that says this is not the complete story. Know what I mean?

Paul G said...

Concerning creation;
It is a little bit confusing to introduce a six thousand year creation theory when it clearly states a six 24 hour day creation.

And there was evening, and there was morning, the first day.
And there was evening, and there was morning, the second day.
And there was evening, and there was morning, the third day etc.
In one day there is only ONE evening and ONE morning, but in a thousand years are many evenings and many mornings, therefore it is a literal 24 hr. day.

Genesis is the account of a natural creation, as in a natural tangible earth, stars, elements, plants, birds, animals and man.

Adam was created a natural earthly man with a Spirit and a soul who was alive till he sinned. And then he died, first spiritually and then he needed to be born again in his earthly lifetime, and after 930 years he naturally
(physically)died.
I think it is important to understand that all creation and the fall of man and death and resurrection was planned by the Lord from the beginning.

Tim, concerning eating fruit and the trees in Genesis.
The Genesis account of creation is such an important account in all history. It is the explanation of how everything was made by the One who made it all Jesus Christ Our Lord and God.
Our Lord is not and never was concerned about eating and drinking. He made that clear and said, that the kingdom of God is not eating or drinking, but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. He also said that it is not what goes into the mouth which defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth is what defiles a man, for what comes out of the mouth is what comes from the heart.

The Jewish people always made a big deal about eating and drinking etc. but we don't.
The reason the Lord uses metaphors is to conceal the things He doesn't want everybody to know and only reveals it to His children.

He lifted up His eyes to heaven and said, ' I praise thee O Father that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and gave it to babes'.

I think and know that Adam was perfect with the mind of Christ, and he wasn't stupid, nor was he deceived, it was his wife who was deceived and she was very deceived.

Brother, I dare to put my neck on the block, and say that Adam was obedient to the Lord to be disobedient.
Perhaps read Gen. 2:18. a few times and think carefully about it. I'm sure you will see it.

To be continued on next page.

Paul G said...

To your question Tim, "So if the beast was created on the 6th day then who was the "us" in verse 1-2? I thought you said the beast had a hand in creation."

On the sixth day the Lord created first the animals or the beasts (Gen.1:25), but one of the beasts God had made was different, called the serpent, that serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals God had made (Gen. 3:1), he was a male and could think, seduce and speak etc. unlike all other animals.
That was on the sixth day before God made man in His image (Gen. 1:25).
There was nobody else there to whom the Lord could speak to, except to the serpent (v.25). Then the Lord said to the serpent, "LET US (plural) make man in OUR (plural) image, in OUR (plural) likeness (v.26)', meaning, the Lord and the serpent, remember, there isn't anybody else there, except the Lord and the serpent who could speak.
So then, the Lord first created ADAM (Gen.1:27) "So God created man in his OWN (singular) image, in the image of God he created HIM (Adam);" afterwards he created Eve, "male and female he created them (v.27)."

Here it is important to understand that the Lord created Adam and Eve perfect and without fault or sin (Gen.1:31), just the same as Himself (Jesus), with one nature (kind), one race, one colour, one DNA structure.

All that happened in Genesis chapter one and then the Lord rested from 'HIS WORK' or creation (Gen. 2:2).
But remember the Lord said, "Let US make"!

Genesis chapter 2 is a detailed continuation of chapter one from another perspective, perhaps like a house plan with chapter 2 and 3 as section plans (detailed explanations of certain sections).

Ok. The Lord has made the first man Adam and Eve in his image (man) (Gen.1;27) and then He rested from His work.
Now it;s up to the serpent to make or mingle his image (beast) with Gods image (man) 'OUR IMAGE' just as it says in (Gen. 1:26).

Because the serpent is a 'beast-kind' (Gen.1:25) and not a 'man-kind', therefore he needed a man-kind female to produce or make a son who is in both the beast and in man's (God's) image which is Cain, and so Eve became the mother of all living (Gen. 3:20), the mother of Cain and the mother of Abel etc.

Genesis chapter 3 explains how the beast (serpent) seduced Eve to sin, or plainly to commit adultery with Eve, which is the first sin and caused the pollution and the fall of the perfect man.

Genesis 3:14, the Lord said to the serpent, "Because you have done this," well it is not difficult to work out what he did.
In Genesis 3:15 the Lord even tells you what he did, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between YOUR CHILDREN and HER CHILDREN."

After the two sons were born, the enmity (Gen.3:15) of the serpents son Cain caused him to slay his half brother Abel (Gen. 4:8), and from there on Satan's children were always at enmity with God's children to this very day.

Now after Abel was murdered, Adam looked at Cain and saw that Cain didn't looked like him or was in his likeness, therefore he wanted another son who was in his likeness, so he got Seth (Gen.5:3).
Also, I'm not saying that there are two creators.
There is a lot more, but where will I stop?

Paul G said...

Brenda, you said, 'where did I say that Jesus ate from the tree of life?'
Here, 'the first man Adam was flesh (he was not allowed to eat from the tree of life), but the second Adam is Spirit (being allowed to 'eat' from the tree of life Jesus.'

(1 Cor.15:45) Jesus is the second Adam, He is the second man who is from heaven and he also is the tree of life in (Gen. 2:9), therefore there was no need for Him to eat from the tree of life.

You said, 'The spiritually 'reborn' collective in Jesus is the second Adam. You ask 'What did they do to warrant death'. It was to question Gods' word, which many still do, that warranted death (separation from God).

Yes I agree with that interpretation that we who are in Jesus 'collective' are the second Adam, or perhaps in the second Adam. I'm not yet sure about that, I need to think a little longer about that.

You think that questioning God's word warrants death.

Well Brenda, I am always questioning God's word, instead of death He gave me life.
And I think that all of us are regularly questioning God's word including you. I don't think that should warrant death, and I don't even think that disobedience warrants death.
What father would kill his son who question his word, or is disobedient?
I think for a son there is correction and discipline, but for a stranger it is death forever.

Paul G said...

Brother Keith, I'm glad that we can agree at least on something :)

I hope that one of your question is also answered in my comments above.

You said, 'Could you also give us some scriptural support to your belief that Adam was created on the sixth day? Especially, since the specific Adam creation account, in Genesis two, clearly says it happen just before the plants and herbs were in the field.'

Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day (Gen. 1:27), and the account of the creation in chapter 2 is from a different perspective as I have explained above.

Plants trees and shrubs were created on the 3 day, and they had to grow out of the ground, and that takes time.
Chapter two shows you that they haven't yet grown out of the ground (Gen.2:5) when Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day, and because the plants have not yet grown out of the ground, that doesn't mean that they were not created a few days before.

I hope that helps to better understand the order of creation.

Concerning the metaphor's; (Gen. 2:9) 'In the middle of the garden were the tree of life'.
All Christians believe that the tree of life is the Lord Jesus Christ.
If that tree is a person, then it is reasonable to say that the tree of knowledge of good and evil is also a person, which amounts to a metaphor.

Brenda said...

Yes Paul,
they were told not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and they questioned what God had said here and ate from that tree. God told them that if they did eat from that tree that they would die, and they did. As for eating from the tree of life, yes we do eat from the tree of life - Jesus when we are reborn in Him. Jesus has no need to eat from that tree because He is that tree, and as I said previously we are collectively the body of Christ - but not the head.

No Doubt said...

Tim,

I would agree with your supposition if it weren't for the fact that in chapter 2 it reiterates the creation or forming of the cattle which puts it within the six days of creation.

Also, the use of ELLEH and the word generations, plural, shows it within the six days of creation.

Even though I agree that not all things in the Bible are linear, the structure of the Hebrew indicates that these two accounts are linear respectively.

As to the big this issue I was talking about where we within the six days a creation that Adam and the garden was created. Keeping with the linear structure of the Hebrew, it shows it happening between the second and sixth day.

Interestingly, if you start on the second day with the creation of the garden, each creation event within chapter 2 takes up one day a piece from day two through day six. I'm not sold on it, but it is an interesting conjecture.

Paul G said...

Brenda, yes, that is what they were told. But it was only the serpent who questioned the Word of God (Gen. 3:1) and he deceived Eve to commit adultery.

But Adam certainly wasn't deceived, he had the mind of Christ just the same as we have the mind of Christ.
He was taught by the Lord just as we are taught by the Lord and he understood the plan of God and the fall of man and fully believed the Lord that even when he would die, the Lord would be capable to resurrect him from death at the appropriate time.
That is the belief and faith of a son of God.

Adam understood the cross of Calvary and he looked forward to it and we who also are the sons of God and look back to the Cross and rejoice with Adam and Eve and all of God's children over the sacrifice of our Lord and God Jesus Christ for ALL our transgression and sins.

Brenda, I also agree that they 'ate', but do you really think that they literally 'ate'?
A fruit? Perhaps an apple?
No Brenda!
That's in children's story books and I know that you are a lot smarter than that.

And I also believe just like you that we are His body and Jesus is the head and all who are reborn in Jesus Christ eat from the tree of life which is in the middle of the garden. And as for all others who are the children of the devil (the serpent) were barred to stretch forth their hands and eat from the tree of life (Gen.3:22).

No Doubt said...

Paul,

"Plants trees and shrubs were created on the 3 day, and they had to grow out of the ground, and that takes time. Chapter two shows you that they haven't yet grown out of the ground (Gen.2:5) when Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day, and because the plants have not yet grown out of the ground, that doesn't mean that they were not created a few days before"

You are correct as to when the plants, shrubs and trees were created. However, as with all of God's creation, he created all things fully grown and mature to reproduce through seeds of their own kind from that point forward. I can't seem to find anything in the scriptures to even suggest that God seeded creation and watched it grow, as you are suggesting.

As for the Tree of Life, it is not Jesus. As a matter of fact, Jesus says that he will give access to the Tree of Life which is in the Paradise of God as referenced in Rev 2:7

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will grant to eat of the tree of life which is in the Paradise of God."

As for the beast, serpent Satan in the garden being as part of the "us" as referenced in Gen 1:26, when God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness."

That is not supported by the Hebrew. The "us" isn't even there in the original scriptures. However, it is implied because of the sentence structure. It's ok to say "us" only if the rules of grammer are followed. With that said, the verse is, "Elohim Amar Asad Adam Tselem Dĕmuwth."

A word for Word translation is,"Gods said make Man Image Like." It this sentence structure, you can only insert "us" when it applies exclusively to the subject, which is Elohim.

Are you saying that the serpent, the beast, Satan is God, or even has the co-power of creation? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'd love to discuss more, but I can't get pass this particular statement until you resolve it because attributing Gods power to, or even along side of Satan is....well, I know that you know what Matthew 12:31 says.

Tim said...

Paul,

I completely agree with you that it is a literal 6-24 hour periods. I believe that there may be "revelations" and "hidden treasures" but I don't think this is one of them. Although I can see what Brenda and No Doubt are saying in there is a spiritual and a physical meaning of creation. I just don't know how it fits yet.

I also agree that Adam was from the beginning having a spirit and a "soul who was alive till he sinned. And then he died, first spiritually and then he needed to be born again in his earthly lifetime, and after 930 years he naturally (physically)died."

And also "I think it is important to understand that all creation and the fall of man and death and resurrection was planned by the Lord from the beginning."

I do not think the story is about eating and drinking but listening to God and obeying him with a free will. And when Eve and then Adam who was right by her side disobeyed then sin and death entered.

"The reason the Lord uses metaphors is to conceal the things He doesn't want everybody to know and only reveals it to His children."

I would agree there too.

Adam was not deceived as you said, he willing disobeyed God. Eve was deceived. That is probably why Adam has been taking the blame. And now all men fall short. Adam opened the door. Jesus closed it. Satan got slammed in it.

Tim said...

Paul,

I just can not see the serpent being the sexual seducer of Eve and being the father of Cain. It says God made man in His own image. It never says and the serpent then made man in his own image. And that man was supposed to rule over all the beasts. If Cain is half and half was he supposed to be ruled by Adam's descendants? God protected him and treated him as a full human being. I really was intrigued by the view that you posed but it just is not scripturally complete. There is too much assumption.

Tim said...

Paul and Brenda,

I know this was directed towards Brenda but I wanted my two cents worth. (Is that just an American phrase?)

Death is not warranted by questioning God. Death came by disobedience to God. Because of one man's disobedience all die but because of one man's obedience all can live.

No Doubt,

I am not denying the vie you have presented is wrong. I just think and feel there is either more to that or we do not have all the information to make the conclusion you have.

Oddly enough we have drifted off the topic. Did God use evolution to create man into the existence he is in today. The answer is no. I am getting ready to move onto the next topic but you three are welcomed to keep discussing this. I have learned from all of you and I am sure all the readers have been blessed by what all of you have said. Search the scriptures!!!

Tim said...

Paul,

After reading more in Chapter 4 I see something that really tells me that Cain is NOT the son of satan. It says Adam knew his wife and she conceived. This tells us that when Adam had sex with Eve she became pregnant by him not satan. These two subjects are not separated. Adam having sex with Eve had resulted in the birth of Cain. And it also says that when she bore Cain she I have gotten a man from YHWH (God). How could Cain be satan's if he was given to her by God? You will probably be able to explain that away but looking at the sentence structure and the whole picture Cain can not possibly be satan's.

Tim said...

No Doubt,

As I was reading Chapter 5 I see something that made me think of the relation between chapters 1 and 2. Chapter 5 says God made man as "bara". It goes back to describe the creation of man as out of nothing not out of dust.

WHat this tells me is that Genesis 5 is like Genesis 2. It goes back and explains another side of the story, but not in a linear way. Which goes with what I have been saying. Genesis is split into divisions. Chapter 1 is about creation of the universe. Chapter 2 is the beginning of man. Chapter 3 and four is the beginning of sin. Chapter 5 is the beginning of the new beginning. They all coincinde with each other but are not connected linearly.

Did that make any sense?

Brenda said...

No doubt,
I believe Jesus is the tree of life. He is the Word of God and in John ch.6 vs.53-54 it says 'So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.' In Genesis ch.3 v.22 it states 'And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:' The only way that man can live for ever is to 'know' God and Jesus Christ as John ch.17 v.3 says 'This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.' We are told, when we are born again and part of the body of Christ, that we are seated in Heavenly places with Him. Paradise is the third Heaven, so the mystery has much more to reveal I would say. As for Adam and Eve being created on the sixth day, as I have said before I believe there is an earthly Adam formed from the dust and a Spiritual Adam and Eve(the bride) formed from man(plural) by believing in Jesus.

Brenda said...

Tim,
the way I said that death comes through questioning Gods word was meant through meaning the consequences of questioning His word as in 'disobedience'. I do not mean the 'questioning', as in 'seeking and asking' the Lord regarding the word of God (scripture) when learning, as we do now.

Paul G said...

Yes Tim, God did make man in His own image, but that is Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:27).
But first He said, 'let US make man in OUR image, referring to TWO images, one is the image of God, which is Adam, the other is the beast who produced a son 'Cain' in his image, or half image, together two images, that is because Eve is the mother of both (Gen. 3:20).

And from that time on sin has entered mankind with the mixing of the DNA, mixing of races and colours etc. the perfect man of God was polluted with sin, and all demons now had access into the human body, this is called the fall of man from perfection.

But Adam wasn't happy when he looked at Cain and he saw that Cain wasn't exactly looking like him in image, therefore he wanted a son who was fully in his image, and he got Seth (Gen. 5:3).

I know that the Scriptures indicate that Adam is the father of Cain, but 1John 3:12 tells us that Cain was born of the evil one, and slew his brother.

I believe that the Lord has hidden that from the world, just like Joseph hid the fact that he wasn't the father of Jesus, because Mary was with child before Joseph had relations with her.

It's designed so that you can't see it Tim, its not for public exhibition. :-)
Remember that all things has been give by God , and there is nothing which is not from God.


I'm not sure Tim. What do you think?
One thing is sure, there were NOT three Gods who came down from heaven to confound their language.
If you carefully read the text, verse 5 and 8 and 9 tells you that it was the Lord (singular) who did it.
So, perhaps a Royal 'US' ? what do you think?

Paul G said...

Keith, you said, 'Are you saying that the serpent, the beast, Satan is God, or even has the co-power of creation? Please correct me if I'm wrong.'

No Keith, Satan certainly is NOT God, although he is called the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:4), with a little (g), and that is because most people believe in him, starting in Genesis, but Jesus said that he is the father of lies.
God (Jesus) is the only one who can create 'out of nothing' and He created His creation to make things from that which is already created in their nature or kind, just like you and I, we can make things, but not out of nothing.
We can MAKE (Gen. 1:26) our children or a nice painting or a table etc. I don't mind if you use the word 'create' in that sense.

So then in the beginning God created the serpent (the beast) to 'MAKE' (Gen. 1:26), and he did make a son whose name was Cain, just as the Lord commanded him (Gen. 1:26).

Brenda said...

Paul,
the first Adam wasn't a son of God he was a man of dust who became a 'living being' when God breathed life into him, and when he disobeyed God (no matter who he was influenced by) he was condemned by God to return to the dust from which he was formed.
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.' Genesis ch.3 v.19.

I believe that 1 Corinthians ch.15 vs.45-49 says it all about the two Adams, and which one comes first.
'Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall (or let us) also bear the image of the man of heaven.'

Brenda said...

Hello again No doubt,
regarding Rev.ch.2 and Jesus being the tree of life, it appears that Rev. chs. 2 and 3 are speaking about the seven churches that are being tested for their faithfulness. Verse 7 of ch.2 says 'He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches; To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.'
This implies to me that being part of the church does not necessarily guarantee you to eat of the tree of life, but that you have to overcome first.' Jesus said to the thief on the cross that he would be with Him in Paradise that day, so is that where He is and are we able to be there with Him, in the third Heaven, when we overcome? There are other things which are granted by God in the other six churches to those who overcome. Is this a generalization of all the spiritual situations that the collective church is in?

Tim said...

I will let this conversation go on but I would rather stick to the topic. I will not be posting though anymore comments if they are off topic too much. I know I have strayed too.

Remember the topic: Did God use evolution to create man?

For more Trinity dialogue go to Paul's site and postings: http://puritanbelief.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-crown-of-jesus-christ.html

Next topic will be Creation vs Big Bang Theory.

Paul G said...

Brenda, at the beginning there was only one Adam created and he was made from dust and to dust he returned, but 960 years later (Gen. 5:5).
God also formed all the birds and beasts out of the dust (Gen. 2:19). and they also go back to dust.
It is the sin in the flesh which causes all mankind from Adam on to return to dust (death).

It was the Adam who was created in the beginning who was the son of God (Luke 3:38) the first son of God, that's what the Bible said.

I know that you think that there were two men created one from dust the other from the Spirit.
Yes, but not at the beginning.

The second Adam is the one who came from the Spirit, that is Jesus and all who are reborn in Christ.
Adam had no bellybutton because he was made from the dust, the second Adam was born of a woman (Mary).

Follow by Email