On the matter of the literal 6 day account of Genesis. Some seem to have a problem with Earth being referred to as regards to the day periods. Let's look at three different possibilities and then you decide for yourself.

1. The days were in relation to some other star and/or planet.
2. The days were in God's own time.
3. The days were in relation to Earth's time.

1. What does the first verse in the bible say ? - Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth."

This means that the subject, the point of focus are the heavens and the Earth. Although the other planets and stars etc were created during this period, the Earth itself is specifically mentioned.

If as an example, God was referring to Jupiter when mentioning days, would you not admit that this makes for unnatural reading ? Why would God make specific reference to Earth and then use some other planet's time zone ? If I'm living in New Zealand and someone asks me the time, why would I give them Japan's time ?

2. To suggest that the days are going by God's own time brings up two dilemmas. Firstly, God is outside time, and is not limited by it. Secondly, if one refers to the passage in Peter saying that to God, a day is like a thousand years, could at most put the creation of the earth at 6000 years and for 1000 years God rested. But again, this makes for unnatural reading because the account of Creation clearly defines night and day being light and dark. If we are to take an age-day theory, then we are bound by the proposition that when it is day it is light, and when it is night it is dark.

For periods of 500 years in complete darkness and another 500 in complete light to make a complete "day", would be utterly unsurvivable.

3. The day's mentioned are obviously in relation to Earth's time, because the context is already given in Genesis 1:1. There is no need to think outside the bounds given.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 15, 2003

Answers

The Bible has to be seen as not a book, but a library. It tells the story of God's revealment of himself to mankind.

The story is a work in progress. Hopefully, mankind continues to learn of God's will.

God reveals himself in terms man can best understand through his word made man, Jesus. Jesus is an extention of God's nature with the Holy Spirit, which we try our best to understand in our human terms as the Holy Trinity.

The inspired word of God, the Bible, is man's way of writing down what we have learned about God and ourselves over a very long period of time.

The Bible has to be seen as a tool given by God to help man live in God's love. Anything that detracts from that is harmful.

Bottom line, God created the world...be it 7 days or 7 billion years. How we live toward our fellow man will be how we are judged.

I'm now stepping from my soapbox. God Bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), January 15, 2003.

OK,guys and gals, I know, I should have said, "be it 6 days or 6 billion years"...I rest my case. God Bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), January 15, 2003.

Hey Oliver,

To go along with your, "This means that the subject, the point of focus are the heavens and the Earth. Although the other planets and stars etc were created during this period, the Earth itself is specifically mentioned."

Don't forget God explains that further:

Ge 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

--

john placette,

As for "Bottom line, God created the world...be it 7 days or 7 billion years. How we live toward our fellow man will be how we are judged."

We will be judged on how we act, whether saved or unsaved, but I hope that you realize that is not is going to get us into Heaven or have us thrown into Hell.

This is what will do that:

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

God Bless!

-- Tim, the Baptist (tlw97@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

Dear Oliver,

You say: [This means that the subject, the point of focus are the heavens and the Earth. Although the other planets and stars etc were created during this period, the Earth itself is specifically mentioned.]

Do you suppose this might have something to do with the fact that earth men wrote it?

You say: [To suggest that the days are going by God's own time brings up two dilemmas. Firstly, God is outside time, and is not limited by it.]

Precisely! And now you contradict yourself. First you say that God was limited (even if by His own choice) to 24-hour days in the creation of the universe. Then you say (correctly) that God is outside of time, and NOT limited by it!

You say: [Secondly, if one refers to the passage in Peter saying that to God, a day is like a thousand years, could at most put the creation of the earth at 6000 years]

Well, that would make it very difficult to explain the presence of billion-year-old deposits of various kinds that are on the earth. However, if you keep in mind that God is OUTSIDE of time, there is no dilemma. This statement of Peter describes that very reality - Peter says here that to God, neither "a day" not "a thousand years" has ANY meaning at all, since these are measurements of that which God is outside of, and unlimited by!

continued ..............

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

You say: [the account of Creation clearly defines night and day being light and dark].

Indeed it does - twice. On the FIRST day, "God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night". Then, on the FOURTH day God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night ... God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also". So a literal interpretation of this would mean that God created light and darkness, day and night, three days before He created those bodies which are the only sources of light and dark, day and night. This is no problem for me of course, since I look at the broader view of what the passage is saying, and don't try to break it down into specific scientific hypotheses. But it looks to me like a real problem for anyone who insists on a hyperliteral interpretation.

You say: [The day's mentioned are obviously in relation to Earth's time]

Yes, the term "days" is used because "days" is a reference to earth time, and the work was written by inhabitants of earth. But as you yourself said above, God is not limited by time, something that He himself created. For God, a day is as a thousand years is as a billion years - all totally meaningless and irrelevant.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

It becomes extremely meaningful and relevant when you consider the verse in Exodus which says "For in 6 days God created the heavens and the earth." No I do not contradict myself by saying that God is outside time. You are basing your beliefs on what scientists dictate to us. Isn't it funny when it comes between the fallible word of scientists and God's infallible word, God's word is always altered to fit in with science ?

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 16, 2003.

Atheists and agnostics place their faith entirely in science, and ignore or reject the revealed truths of God. This is very sad.

Fundamentalists claim to place their faith entirely in the Word of God, but actually place their faith in their own ability to interpret the written Word, ignoring or rejecting all known truth which does not coincide with their personal guesses regarding the meaning of scripture. This is also very sad.

continued ..........

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 16, 2003.

A balanced perspective acknowledges that both revelation and science provide us with truth, and the truths of one cannot be in conflict with the truths of the other. On the matter of the origin of the universe, both revelation and science provide us with valuable information. One incontrovertible piece of information provided by science is the fact that the universe gradually developed over a period of many millions of years. Just how many millions (or billions) is still a matter of some scientific controversy - but the basic fact is not. We know this is true from mountains of corroborating evidence from many different disciplines. Those of us who accept the Word of God as truth immediately know therefore that nothing in revelation can conflict with this proven fact. This realization offers us valuable insights regarding the valid interpretation of Genesis. It is not a matter of which truth to accept and which truth to reject. Truth is never to be rejected! When two facts are both certainly true, the only reasonable interpretation of either is that which acknowledges their complete mutual compatibility. The Church, the only divinely authorized interpreter of God's Word, takes just such a balanced approach. Fundamentalists do not. Sadly, they simply reject offhand any truth which does not conform to their own simplistic, hyperliteral, unauthoritative guesses concerning the meaning of God's Holy Word. In so doing, they reject much truth, and accept much untruth.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 16, 2003.

You will be interested to find that many secular scientists believe that light may have in fact slowed down over a period of time.

Think of the implications.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 16, 2003.

Paul,

"So a literal interpretation of this would mean that God created light and darkness, day and night, three days before He created those bodies which are the only sources of light and dark, day and night."

Let's take a look at what you claim:

--

[1] There was darkness:

Ge 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

[2] There was light:

Ge 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

[3] The light called Day and the darkness called Night.

Ge 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

[4] Lights created to divide the Day and Night [Light and Darkness]:

Ge 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

[5] Created lights to rule the Day and Night [Light and Darkness]:

Ge 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

--

So actually those "only sources of light and dark", are rulers of the Day and Night [Light and Darkness].

So tell me what is the light in verse 3?

God Bless!

-- Tim, the Baptist (tlw97@cox.net), January 16, 2003.

Oliver is right. We've been arguing for the case that the Earth was either created in a matter of days, or in a longer stretch of time (as we know time now). However, there is no reason to doubt that the Earth, Man, and all of creation could have been created at the blink of an eye. If a thousand years is like a day, then a day could also be likend to a milisecond. Scientific data leads one to believe that the Earth has been around for billions of years, but what is this based on? It is based on carbon dating and other timing methods. But they still don't really know how things moving at the spead of light are effected. Nor are we positive of the condition of the earth at it's creation. Example: God could have created the Earth in one day (as in 24 hours) - but that one-day-old Earth could have carbon samples, etc. that might date it 1 billion years earlier.

All in all - what's the big deal? We know who the creator is, God! And we know the basic order in which things were created, and the reasons for their creation.

In Christ.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), January 16, 2003.

Dear Tim,

That's exactly what I was asking YOU! Since it wasn't until verse 16 that God created the two great lights (the sun and moon), and also the stars, where did the light in verse 3 come from?? The Sun and stars are the earth's only direct sources of light in the cosmos, and the moon is the only significant indirect source. The answer of course is not important. In fact, there is no answer, except to say that the wording chosen by the writers reflects their ignorance of astronomy and astrophsics. Which is fine with me, since science is NOT what this writing is about! The message God wanted to convey through this text still comes through to me loud and clear! I feel no compulsion to force God to do his work according to a timeclock punched on earth.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 16, 2003.

Paul, it is a sad approach that you have to the bible. You look at it from the point of view of fallible man who can make mistakes through his lack of scientific knowledge. I find this extremely suprising from one who is of a faith that teaches the infallibility of the Pope.

To you, the bible is just another book, originated by man.Please note, the bible is God's word. God is the author of the scripture. If you do not believe this, then I really wonder what you base your faith on at all.

God knows all the laws of physics, biology, etc. God is the divine author. He knows what He is talking about. Like I said in a previous post, whenever fallible scientists dictate their teachings to us, it's always God's infallible word that gets altered.

Do not throw away a literal translation just because the world disagrees. God will make fools of the wise, and make the foolish wise. Think on that my friend. May God restore your faith in His infallible and perfect word.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 16, 2003.

Oliver, I agree with Paul to a 99.99% on this matter. The light in verse 3 is the light of God expanding through the universe, since God is light. You will understand Genesis if you put it in perspective: who looks like the author, or who is the main character? Chs. 1-11:9 deal with creation. Ch.11:10-50:1-26 the main focus is in the geneology of Joseph, the son of Jacob. So Joseph and his descendants penned this section of Genesis. You never see mentioned in his geneology that his ancestors rested on Saturday, or observed Saturday (Sababath= which goes from Friday evening to saturday evening). Continuing...

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), January 16, 2003.

Exodus -Deuteronomy deal with Moses and Aaron and his descendants. Moses receives the law ( 10 commandments) one of which is the Sabbath. This happened around June,1248 BC according to my calculations counting jubilee years backwards from 27-28 AD, a possible jubilee year, since Jesus mentions a true Jubilee in Luke 3:19. Jesus began his ministry in the 15 year of Tiberius which started in August 14AD. I also use 2 Kings 25: 27-27 which is 561 BC, as a year of release =Jubilee, and 2 kings 19:29 (709 BC) as another example of a Jubilee. They spent close to 215 years in Egypt and another 215 are reckoned from Abraham to Jacob, Joseph's father entering Egypt.So since Abraham, God's chosen man to Moses is about over 500 years. Years where people did not observe the sabbath.

In Exodus 208-11 the reason for observing the Sabbath is because God rested on the 7th day. But if you read Deuteronomy 5: 12-15 the reason is different: it was meant for the hebrews to have rest because it seems they didn't rest in Egypt during their days of slavery. Deuteronmy is written in first person, that is Moses. Exodus is written sometimes in 3rd person sometimes first. In real life with go with first person , or eyewitness accountability.

Conclusion: since ch. 1 of Genesis goes with Exodus 19 and not Deuteronomy 5, then it was composed after Moses death. This means each day of creation could be from a day (in God's eyes) to billions of years, since the universe is humongus.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), January 16, 2003.

Genesis Chapter 2 1 Thus the heavens and the earth and all their array were completed. 2 Since on the seventh day God was finished with the work he had been doing, he rested on the seventh day from all the work he had undertaken. ****************************************************************** Think God really needed to rest?

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), January 17, 2003.