The Literal Genesis Account of Creation

Well there's two obvious poitns that have to be raised.Your first list of 49 things says that all the events of Genesis 2:4 to the end of Genesis 4 occurred in one day.Obviously it's not a literal day since you've got Cain, Abel and Seth born and growing up in that period. (Genesis 5 says that Adam was 130 years old when Seth was born and that Seth was 105 years old when Enosh was born, so that's at least 235 years).And then there's the question of where the account in Genesis 1:2 - 2:3 fits into the rest of Genesis. It has to be somewhere, but where ? And why does this account appear first ? Why has it (according to your ideas) been split out of the main narrative ?

quote:

---

It is one day.

​

In the OP I said I was going to look at Genesis as a literal account of the creation.

---

Your events include Adam and Eve having at least three children, who grow to adulthood. Genesis 5 says that it takes at least 235 years. I pointed out these facts, so you need to explain them within your literal framework.

quote:

---

Second point: where Gen. 1:2-2:3 takes place.

​

Genesis 1:5 could have been billions of years later in time as we know it but to God it was one day.

---

I didn't ask for the time between them. I asked where it fitted into the text. So please answer the question.

quote:

---

Genesis 1:2 comes after Genesis 4:26.

---

That's not a very helpful answer. I assume that you mean that it happens immediately after the birth of Enosh (Genesis 4:26, Genesis 5:26). But Genesis 5 mentions no such event. Come to that Genesis 4:26 itself isn't obviously in chronological sequence - Genesis 4 gives a number of generations of Cain's descendants but only 1 for Seth. So do the events of Genesis 4:26 mark the end of the day or Genesis 4:24 ?

quote:

---

Genesis 5 has nothing to do with what took place in the day the Lord God created the heaven and the earth.

---

Genesis 5 overlaps with Genesis 4 including the births of Seth and Enosh which I have explicitly referred you to twice and you included those events in your "one day".

quote:

---

As pointed out in Genesis 2:4 there was a series of events that took place the same day as the heaven and earth was created.

​

Those things are listed in Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:26.

---

What is the basis for choosing Genesis 4:26 as the end of the day ? Especially when Genesis 5 tells us that the birth of Enosh in Genesis 4:26 occurred when Adam was 235 years old ?

quote:

---

At a later date billions of years later in time as you and I know it but as far as that period was concerned it was still the same day as there had been no night yet.

---

So are you now saying that your "day" is billions of years of continuous daylight (before the Sun had been created) ?.And where do the billions of years fit into the Genesis genealogies ? Are you really putting billions of years between the birth of Enosh and the birth of Kenan (which, according to Genesis 5:9, happened only 90 years later ?).

quote:

---

How can Genesis 5:1 overlap chapter 4?

---

I said Genesis 5, not just 5:1. Genesis 5:1 of course tell you that it deals with Adam and his descendants - a subject covered in Genesis 4.

quote:

---

If chapter 5 starts telling the generations of the man created in Genesis 1:26 that was created in the image and likeness of God it cannot be talking about the man formed from the dust of the earth in Genesis 2:7, because this man is included in the generations that was in the day the Lord God created the heaven and the earth.

---

If the two are different then why assume that it's the man from Genesis 1:26 and not the man from Genesis 2:7 ? The man is named Adam. His son is named Seth and his grandson Enosh. These are the same names as Genesis 4:26.

quote:

---

You assumed wrong. If you read the op and my other posts you would know that I say that there were billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

---

Which does not in any way contradict my interpretation. Therefore you are already indulging in the usual creationist game of pretending that anyone who disagrees with you hasn't read your posts.

quote:

---

I would think some kind of extinction event had to take place for the earth to be in the condition we find it in, in Genesis 1:2.
Unless you have a better idea.

---

Yes I do have a better idea. Your interpetation is completely wrong. The later chapters of Genesis continue the story of Genesis 2:4-4:26 - there is no gap into which your "billions of years" fit. Your interpretation is not a literal reading of Genesis at all.Genesis simply contains two creation stories, neither of which fits with out scientific knowledge.

quote:

---

You say I am completely wrong. Maybe so.

---

I say that that is the best answer to the question of Genesis 5. Your view seems to be that Genesis 5 represents a sudden jump forward of billions of years and is talking about people who coincidentally happen to have the same names and relationships as those mentioned in Genesis 4. That's not a natural reading of the text - there's nothing to support it at all. The best reading is that there is no coincidence, they are the same people and there is no gap.

quote:

---

You say Genesis contains 2 creation stories. Then try to make them into one.

---

That would be a mistake. The stories contradict. A literal reading doesn't require us to try to harmonise the stories. And in fact you go well beyond a literal reading in your interpretation.

If anyone's interested in what Genesis actually says, John Wilkins has a series of blog posts on his Evolving ThoughtsThe first entry is here.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.