Creation as presented in Genesis chapters 1 and 2

Ah i see.Do you include the heavens/universe in that 6,000 year time frame?

i think you are confusing a very simple accountIf you have a look at all ancient tablets you'll notice that none of them open with a title as we know titles today. There are no chapters and no paragraphs....just a bulk of text from start to finish. Its the same with the genesis account of creation.However, what some researchers have discovered about ancient writings is that the first line of text, no matter how long, is actually the title for the information contained on the tablet.If you apply that to the bible, then you can easily conclude that "In the beginning God created the heavens and earth" is simply the title for the information that follows. It has nothing to do with an account of creation, its simply Moses opening words for the information that followed. It was the title of the writing.But yes i agree with you that the earth was created along with the heavens in the beginning which is what Gen 1:1 states. However, I dont believe that at that time, he also made animals and light and seasons etc. They came later when God began to prepare the earth for habitation....so everything from vs 2 onward is explaining that process of preparing the existing earth for habitation including the creation of the life.It would be like God now looking at Venus, a planet that has existed for millions/billions of years, and deciding to prepare it for habitation...this would be where vs 2 comes into play.

what do you mean by the light period and when (which verse) are you saying was the light period?

So if the first day comes in vs 5, what came before it? No days are mentioned, but the existing earth was mentioned.In vs 2 it says 'the earth was formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of the waters'....this is an existing earth but no life was present for it says the earth was void.so this obviously came before there was any light because no light is mentioned...only darkness. the problem i can see here is that Gen chpt 2 is speaking about the creation of mankind....not the earth. So the context has completely changed. It has nothing to do with the 'earth' but has everything to do with 'mankind'So while chpt 1 was a complete overview of all of Gods creations including man, Chpt 2 now looks only at the creation of man. It even opens with the words
Gen2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth and all their army came to their COMPLETION.So you assertion is that something new was created in chpt 2 but the text in no way indicates this...it specifically says that everything was complete then goes into the history again but this time only mentions mankind.You also still havnt commented on why Jesus himself spoke of the Gen 1 and 2 as if it was one account. If anyone knew the truth it would be him.

So rather then conclude that the 'evenings' mentioned could be figurative, you assume that because vs 5 says there was a first evening and morning, you conclude that there must have been a light period before light is mentioned?I wonder why moses wasnt instructed to write about it. at that point in time, yes. you dont think its possible that Moses could have used that terminology and then go on to describe mankinds appearance without infering the earths creation?Nothing he says goes into the same details as he did in chpt 1 and you can see the context of what he's talking about quite easily. Its mankinds appearance that he discusses, nothing more. thats right.However you seem to be saying that there were two different creations and i dont understand why you would be saying that.The earth was created a very long time ago along with the rest of the universe....the earth was one of the heavenly bodies created as part of the universe so of course i was existing in Vs 1. But there was no life on it until God created the right conditions.those conditions were what he created from Vs2 onward. What you are speculating is that after the completion of Gods creations (earth, animals, vegetation, man) he went on to create a new man and woman (adam and eve) as if there were already a human population on earth before adam and eve were created.thats pure speculation based on reading the text in a chronological order. But why are you reading the text in a chronological order? The context itself shows that Chpt 2 is not a chronological account.Chpt 1 is a chronological accountDay 1: Let light come to be
Day 2: Let an expanse come to be
Day 3: Let the dry land appear
Day 3: Let the earth cause grass to shoot forth
Day 4: ‘Let luminaries come to be in the expanse
Day 5: ‘Water creatures and flying creatures’
Day 6: ‘Domestic animal and wild beast & Man in Gods image created'But chpt 2 is simply the history of man. It just takes up at a point in the 3rd day after dry land appeared but before land plants were created, adding the details of what was needed for the arrival of humans
Chpt 2
Vs 5: Completed earth has no cultivated ground
Vs 6: Mist would water the earth
Vs 7: God creates a man for the purpose of cultivating the ground
Vs 8: God plants a garden in Eden for the man to live in
Vs 9: God causes to grow desirable food/vegetation
Vs 15: God settles the man in the garden
Vs 16: God gives man directions regarding the forbidden tree
Vs 18: God decides it not good for man to continue alone
Vs 19: God was forming Animals and Man was naming them
Vs 21: God creates a woman from mans rib
Vs 22: God brings woman to man and performs 1st marriage ceremony. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

The yom in that verse is what shows that all the previous yoms are figurative. The yom could not be a 24 hour day in that verse because the universe is created in that same period.And think about it, if the earth was created in 1 day, how many days must the millions/billions of other heavenly bodies in the universe have taken to create? If the earth took 1 day, then surely every other planet took 1 day each at least....that would amount to milllions/billions of days, yes?So could the yom/day in Gen 2:4 really just be 1 24hr day? I dont think so. you are taking Isaiah out of context. Isaiah 45 is a prophecy about King Cyrus freeing the then captive Jews from their bondage. Thru Isaiah God is reassuring the captives that they will not be left without salvation...He assures them that his purposes will be realised because he did not create them or the earth in vain. He has a purpose and it will be fulfilled. Yep i see what you are saying and i disagree with you.

remove the translators chapter numbering system and it becomes one account as the way moses wrote it.The splitting up of the account is only to help us find things easier...it should not be dogmatically viewed as being an actual 'new' chapter as if thats what Moses intended.without the splitting up of the account, this is what you'd have: Perhaps the translator should have started his new chapter from Vs 5: If he did make vs 5 the beginning of Chpt 2, do you think you could read it in the same way as you are doing now? And do you really think that the translator who made the numbering system actually had any better idea of how the account should be understood then anyone else? Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

he is also a 'God of order' who does things in an orderly fashion as the account in genesis chpt 1 shows. If it all happened at once, why does Genesis 1 state that various stages happend on different days?day 1 'let there be light'
day 2 'Let a dividing occur between the waters and the waters.’
day 3 'Let dry land & vegetation appear'
day 4 'Let the sources of light be visible in the expanse'
dat 5 'Let water creatures & flying creatures swarm forth'
day 6 'Let land animals and mankind appear'How could this all happen in 1 day, if the account shows it happened over 6 days? where is this light period mentioned....and if you say vs 5, then show me the light period that came before vs 5. so is the earth going to stop spinning?We will always experience night and day literally.... but figuratively speaking a night period is a time of darkness. It can be a spiritual darkness such as the darkness that surrounded the jews in the days before the Messiah appeared. Zechariah spoke a prophecy about the light of salvation that the messiah would bring Luke 1:67And Zech‧a‧ri′ah its father was filled with holy spirit, and he prophesied, saying: 68Blessed be Jehovah the God of Israel, because he has turned his attention and performed deliverance toward his people. ...77to give knowledge of salvation to his people by forgiveness of their sins, 78because of the tender compassion of our God. With this [compassion] a daybreak will visit us from on high, 79to give light to those sitting in darkness and death’s shadow, to direct our feet prosperously in the way of peace.The new heaven and earth will be in a continual 'light' only in the sense that God will be ruling the nations and the spiritual light from him will not cease. Isaiah didnt deliver that message to Cyrus...he delivered it to the Jews who were in captivity....Cyrus was not located in Babylon and Isaiah was certainly not located in Persia, the home city of Cyrus.This was Gods message to the jewish inhabitants of Babylon. It has nothing to do with the genesis account of creation. I've already done that and there is no point going over it again. You want to read the text that way, but all you are doing in the process is complicating the text and providing a terribly false contradiction of the creation account.No wonder people are turning away from the bible.

Ok, lets see if that works. So according to reading it this way, there was no primitive planet, no animals, no seas....but there was land with no man to cultivate the ground, so God plants a garden and makes a man and woman and then along comes a snake (keep in mind that no animals are mentioned when you read the text this way)All you are doing is complicating a perfectly fine and logical account of creation that God has provided us with. I think you should trust that he knows what he's talking about and accept what he has provided us with .... there is no need to change things around imo.

Hi ICANT,I think there is still something to be said about how Jesus spoke of the vs's from Gen 1 and Gen 2 as if they were the same account.When he was questioned about the legality of Divorce, he showed that the man and woman who were made 'in the beginning' were Adam and Eve. Now look at where Jesus teaching stems from. the second part of his reply is clearly from Genesis 2:24 So if your affirmation is that some other humans were created in 'the beginning', why would Jesus speak of them as if they were Adam and Eve? Unless of course he knew that Adam and Eve WERE the humans created in the beginning which would logically mean that Moses did not write about two distinct and different accounts of creation where other humans were created before Adam and Eve.It would prove that the accounts in genesis chpt 2 is simply a more detailed account about Gods creation of mankind. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.Edited by Peg, : No reason given.Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

No, i dont realise that. How do you know the earth always had light shining on it?Does light shine on the surface of all the planets in our solar system? How about Jupiter with its very thick atmosphere, is there light shining down to the surface of that planet?Is there light shining down to the farest depths of the oceans on earth? Wasnt the primitive earth completely covered in oceans before the land was made to appear? Could light have reached those depths? you are assuming that because there was a 'day 1' there must have been a light period before it, yet that is not what Genesis says. Genesis 1:2 says 'the earth was formless and waste and there was darkness upon its surface'so the earth existed in darkness before God caused light to shine on it. Why are you saying it was the opposite? Think about it. If the earth was already turning and there was already light, why would God need to make light? Why did he need to make a 'division' to create to the seasons?
The answer is that the primitive earth (the one he created along with the rest of the universe) did not have all these features and gen chpt 1 is the explanation of the things God put into place in order for it to have those features. Before that it was just a primitive planet covered by water with a thick atmosphere with no light and no life on it. Yet the hebrew definitions you posted show that they could be
RESULTS, PROCEEDINGS or COURSE OF HISTORY
It is not always only with regard to human decendents.Gen 2:4 is actually written in hebrew as follows: so according to whats written, the 'geneological annals' were in regard to earth and heaven...not people. We have geneological annals of mans history and it includes the names of all the decendents of Adam which shows that it is speaking about human decendents....but in this instance, it is speaking about the earth and the description of the creative days ARE the geneological annals. Why would he do that? Whats so wrong with the earth that it needs to be destroyed and a new one created? I dont want to sound argumentative here, but Isaiahs prophecy was written over 150 before Cyrus’ was even born...Isaiah had long died before the propecy was fulfilled, so no, it wasnt addressed to Cyrus and he had no idea that it even existed. He was used by God to free the jews from their captivity, but he certainly didnt know he was fulfilling a prophecy about himself.(Its because of these sorts of prophecies that the jews were able to identify true prophets and this is how they knew if a writing was from God or not.)Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

the people in chpt 1 ARE Adam & Eve.Dont you see that he says that the couple whom God married were the couple made 'in the beginning'they are one and the same. It was on day 6 that God made man in his image....it was on day 7 that God rested according to Gen chpt 2 and if he rested on day 7, and made man on day 6, then it stands to reason that the people he made in chpt 1 on day 6 are in fact Adam and Eve.

it was created along with the rest of the universe at some point in the timeless past.... i cant put a time on it because its unknown. Is it millions of years ago, billions of years ago??? How old is the universe and where is its beginning? At which point in the universes creation did God create planet earth??? I dont think anyone can know this unless God specifically gives us its age and he hasnt done so yet. Perhaps if you took all of the possible definitions the hebrew word Yom into consideration, you'd find that it is actually very easy to work it out.Besides that, you really need to stop reading these accounts as two separate accounts. They are not.
They are the same account but the first is the account of the entire process of transforming the earth into a habitable planet, and the 2nd is a detailed look at mankind only. i accept that the hebrew word Yom also means a 'period of time' or an 'age' or an 'eon' so i dont have a problem with the universe being created in a 'day'
Its not a literal 24 hour day. Its an age....and unspecified length of time. The scripture you quoted shows that the man and woman created in chpt 1 is the same man and woman named Adam and Eve in chpt 2 and their decendents are listed in chpt 5.I'm failing to understand how you come to the conclusion that these people are different people. well you seem to know enough to be able to proclaim that he is going to destroy the earth. If he has revealed such a major event in the bible then surely he has revealed WHY he would do such a thing. He always informed the isrealites as to why something bad was going to happen, so surely he would do so with this event also. you simply shouldnt be reading it as being 'addressed' to Cyrus. Like I said, it was written down over 150 years before Cyrus was even born, so how could it possibly be addressed to him?

the hebrews had several definitions for 'heavens'. Yes, it can mean the area of sky where the birds fly in earths atmosphere as was created in genesis...but it also can be extended beyond that as the following scriptures show The source of the original light was the existing sun.In Gen 1:3 the hebrew word for light is different to the word used for light on the 4th day.
The first instance of 'light' uses the word ’ohr meaning light in a general sense.
But on the fourth day the word changes to ma‧’ohr′ which means the SOURCE of the light.The way to understand this is that the light (ohr) on the first day could be seen, but the source of light (maohr) the sun could not be seen. This would have been because of a thick atmosphere such as when we have an overcast day. The day is still light, but we cannot see the sun or feel its full effects...its diffused by the clouds.On the 4th day, God causes the overcast to clear so that the sun could fully shine on the earth and from an earthly perspective, 'appear' in the heavens. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

figuratively, we could say Gods creative works began in a period of darkness until all that he had accomplished was clearly visible.literally, i dont think the movement of any planet in the universe would have any effect on where God is sitting. God is said to be surrounded in light always, so he would never experience a 'day and night' in the literal sense. Gen 1:27And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them....
31After that God saw everything he had made and, look! [it was] very good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth and all their army came to their completion. 2And by the seventh day God came to the completion of his work that he had made, and he proceeded to REST"Nowhere in genesis do we read that the 7th day came to its completion. So the only logical conclusion is that the people created on the 6th day, were the end of gods creations....they were Adam and Eve as mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 19:4Did YOU not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female (gen 1:27)
5and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? (Gen 2:24)If Jesus beleived that the people created in Gen 1 were any different to the people created in Gen 2, there is no way he would have spoke of them as the same people. the physical evidence disagrees with you. There were animals existing on the earth before man showed up. So the first account in genesis is the account of the chronological creation, whereas the account in chpt 2 is looking specifically at mankind. The reason for that is because moses was describing the 'fall' of mankind from perfection and from their garden home. have you taken into account the words of the prophets Isaiah, of King Solomon and of the psalmists who tell us that the earth will NEVER be destroyed? That it will exist forever...that Gods purpose for it will be fulfilled and he will never allow it to be destroyed??? it was produced over milleniums of time. The 3rd and 4th day saw the production of plantlife and sealife....these 2 'ages' could have spanned millions of years. The 5th & 6th day could have also spanned millions of years. That would have been plenty of time for such elements to form...millions of years of plants and animals dying is perfectly logical and the physical evidence also backs it up.The 'days' of genesis are not 24 hours....the physical evidence and even the use of the word in the account shows that its not a literal 24 hour day.