Genisis

[Sojourner55]

Clearly I opened a hornet's nest. I was just looking for an answer for interest sake.

All the answers and comments have some real valid points and we can probably debate these points until the end of time, but at some stage we have to ask ourselves if it matters that we agree with each other on this point. The fact is God created us. How and when did he do this? Maybe it is not for us to understand the "how" but to comprehend that that he is trying to teach us something from Genesis and it is for us to grasp the lesson and apply it to our lives today.

Hi, and welcome to the board,
This is nothing. After you've been here awhile, you'll see that a thread can veer off into something completely different in about half a heartbeat. All it takes is a post that mentions a peripheral issue, then a comment on that, and before you know it, the thread has taken a sharp turn onto Derailed Avenue. And we often have far more "spirited" exchanges, as well--particularly regarding the usual controversial issues for which there are divided schools of thought. But for he most part we have fun doing it, and give little thought to whether it's a dead horse, already beaten a pulp.

[divaD]

And how exactly did Adam have dominion over the fish of the sea being that he lived inside this garden?

Genesis 2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.


I wonder if there were any fish here? Or maybe Adam only had dominion over freshwater fish, but not sea water fish. lol. Just because Genesis 1 says fish of the sea, it also says fowls of the air. Coincidently, Genesis 2 tells us God made some fowls of the air as well, and that Adam named them, which implies dominion. So it seems to me, your conclusions would have to be that man on the outside of the garden was given dominion on all the outside animals, while Adam was given dominion on all the inside animals. I wonder who then gave names to all the outside animals, since it couldn't have been Adam according to what your theory is adding up to?

[divaD]

Clearly I opened a hornet's nest. I was just looking for an answer for interest sake.

All the answers and comments have some real valid points and we can probably debate these points until the end of time, but at some stage we have to ask ourselves if it matters that we agree with each other on this point. The fact is God created us. How and when did he do this? Maybe it is not for us to understand the "how" but to comprehend that that he is trying to teach us something from Genesis and it is for us to grasp the lesson and apply it to our lives today.

I think you're reading too much into this. It's just something interesting to discuss is all. I don't think anyone is losing sleep over what another poster thinks about this matter one way or the other. I know I'm not.

[ewq1938]

Genesis 2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.


I wonder if there were any fish here? Or maybe Adam only had dominion over freshwater fish, but not sea water fish. lol.

A river is not a sea.

Just because Genesis 1 says fish of the sea, it also says fowls of the air. Coincidently, Genesis 2 tells us God made some fowls of the air as well, and that Adam named them, which implies dominion. So it seems to me, your conclusions would have to be that man on the outside of the garden was given dominion on all the outside animals, while Adam was given dominion on all the inside animals. I wonder who then gave names to all the outside animals, since it couldn't have been Adam according to what your theory is adding up to?

Yes, Adam only named the animals God created after him. Adam's dominion was within the garden only.

[Eyelog]

And how exactly did Adam have dominion over the fish of the sea being that he lived inside this garden?

C'mon, now,EW, God was speaking a blessing and a directive over mankind. He set it up in general that Mankind would have dominion over all the earth and its contnts, to rule and so forth. The text is perfectly clear about that. There is no requiremenht that Adam try to play Posseidon from the Garden. That's just silly. that's not a plain read, abut another attempt at a quasi - literal rea, which is your perpetual Ahilles heal in your inane remarks like this one.

[Eyelog]

A river is not a sea.



Yes, Adam only named the animals God created after him. Adam's dominion was within the garden only.

Clearly, on Day Six, God said, "fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." That was, again, a generalized blessing adn directive, not to be achieved withut first "filling the earth." In the Garden, earlier on the 6th Day, Adam had no kids, let alone a wife at first. He was not espected to fill the earth instantly. Is that what you think God was doing, speaking into existence the entiretly of the human population? Nonsenses. Eve was the mother of ALL the living, and hence the name Adam gave her. That comes out at 3:20.

[Eyelog]

I assure you I am continuing in my sanity and rationality here. It's just such a new concept to most people that they have a hard time dealing with it. No need to agree, but at least see why I am saying this based on what's written.




Actually I am the one relying on a plain read of the text...In Gen is plainly states that animals are created before man, in Gen 2 it plainly and clearly states that Adam was created first, then God wanted Adam to have helpers so he makes animals. That's the plain reading of the text




Ah but I notice you do not list the order of creation for Gen 2 as you did for Gen 1 above....why is that? Would you be so kind as to do the same for Gen 2 so we can compare, compare, compare?






Labeling one "more precise" and one "general" does not make it so. Gen 2 is just as "precise" in it's details, in fact much more precise than Gen 1 since we have a detail description of how woman was made which is devoid in Gen 1.




Sure but for Gen 2, animals are not created before Adam. That is easy to prove:

Gen 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Man is made and put into garden.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Man is alone, God will make a helper.

Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

God makes all kinds of animals but a true helper wasn't found so a female was created.

How do you dispute this?



I do not recognize that because it is highly chronological. I can't think of any of Genesis that isn't chronological.



Told from Gen 1 only. You skipped over Gen 2's order of creation.



Oh, if only you could say this to yourself lol The text and I are great friends and we speak and listen to each other all the time haha. Gen 2 has much to say



Oh no, I am resolving long held contradictions not creating them. Gen 1 and Gen 2 do not match no matter how much people have tried to awkwardly blend them together. Plus, you must be confusing me with someone else because my openly stated position is that we do not know the age of the earth. I never stated an exact amount of it's age.



I'm offering my view, you decide if it's worthy of a correction.

Look, on Day 6, in Ge 1, we get the animals and then mankind. Just as creating the heavens and earth and light itself, without light sources, was all done on Day One, there is little detail of what all went on on that day. Did one aspect get created before another? How much precision in that is expressed, really?

But then we get to Ge 2:

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

So, we know that by the end of Day 6 God was done. Does that mean that the entire earth had been filled with humans dominating and ruling over it? Of course not. Were all the seas totally teeming at that point? Why should we assume that. Was the entire earth coveredin vegetation? All were directed to multiply and fill, suggesting ongoing so-called natural processes at that point, the kind we see going on today. God wound up the 'clock' and from the end of day Six on it's been ticking.

The text goes on:

4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven.

Here, the word day is referring to the day Moses just finished saying God finished.

5 Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground.

This means there were 'naturally occurring' plants, but nothing cultivated by man, i.e., domesticated plants.

6 But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

This is on Day 6, as indicated in Chaper One. God formed the first man. Note that in Ch 1 the description is a broad, sweeping description of creating mankind, male and female, and stating his blessing over their species and His directives for it:

²⁶ Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” ²⁷ God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. ²⁸ God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” ²⁹ Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you ... Ge 1.

We can see,again, a sweeping description, much like at Ge. 1:1-5. No great detail. But, yes, He did create the animals prior to creating mankind:

Day Six

²⁴ Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. ²⁵ God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Ge 1.

But the description in Ge 2 begins with the overarching statement that all in creation had been created before day 7. Then, it zeroes in onthe specific act of creating the very first person: " 7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being."

You cannot conclude from this focussed emphasis on man that the sun and moon and light itself, let alone the earthand its vegetation, had not already been created, so why do you HAVE to say God's silence about the animals at this point shows they came after the first human? Well, if the text says so, we might see it that way. What does it say?

8 The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. 9 Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 10 Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden; and from there it divided and became four rivers. ... 15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

So, Moses repeats himself, twice saying God put Adam into the Garden where God had formed it with really great trees and vegetation, and the reason he put Adam there was to cultivate it. The whole emphasis of this chapter so far is on God creating a special place for Adam to work at dominating and ruling over the vegetation. This does not mean the ultimate, broader purpose for mankind was not to rule over fish and animals, etc., as the earth was filled with humans.

18 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” 19 Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. ... ²⁵ And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

To say God at this point made some specific animals, just as He had made a specific garden with specific plants in it does not contradict the general statements from Ge 1 that on Day 6 He created the animals in all their kinds and mankind. Indeed, there is every indication this Garden business of creation all occurred on day 6 anyway. The idea God can or would only make animals until noon, and then work only on mankind from noon to dusk is not at all a necessary way to look at the 'chronology.' Both happened on day 6, and he has already done a lot of creating of animals and even Adam outside of the Garden. Note that He put Adam into the Garden after He got it ready, and then He created a bunch of animals just for the Garden.

By the time we get to God making the woman, we are still on day six. The idea that God had made millions of male and female humans on Day 6 prior to this act in the Garden is not at all required from the text. In fact, it is flatly denied. She is the first woman, and Adam the first man. They were to fill the earth and dominate it. But God started them off in the Garden on day 6, just as the text says. Remember, Ch 2 begins with saying it was all done before day 7.

Thereafter, we get into chapter 3:

¹ Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ....

There. That's the amazing chronology. Nothing in it requires the contradictions you see. I'm not even sure why you see any at all.

You throw down the guantlet to show the chronology, but the plain read of GE 2 does not at all try to contradict Ge1. Nor is it a new 'genre' of oriental eipic poetry or tales or myths or any of that certified CRAP.

So, you and all the gappers and day-agers and other deceived individuals who can't just let God be God and the Bible be the Bible need to either open your eyes or ask the Lord to do it for you. If my explanation doesn't do it for you, that's because you have a log or something stuck there, mon frere.

Hope that goes better for you in the future.

[fewarechosen]

read genises 1:2

now ask yourself this - is "waters" - h20 ?

if waters is not h2o what makes you think fowl is a bird ? or light is sunlight ?

[ewq1938]

C'mon, now,EW, God was speaking a blessing and a directive over mankind. He set it up in general that Mankind would have dominion over all the earth and its contnts, to rule and so forth. The text is perfectly clear about that. There is no requiremenht that Adam try to play Posseidon from the Garden. That's just silly. that's not a plain read, abut another attempt at a quasi - literal rea, which is your perpetual Ahilles heal in your inane remarks like this one.

Just saying that it couldn't apply to Adam.

[ewq1938]

In the Garden, earlier on the 6th Day, Adam had no kids, let alone a wife at first.

The Garden wasn't created on day 6.

Eve was the mother of ALL the living, and hence the name Adam gave her. That comes out at 3:20.

Only because through her lineage would the Christ come. Not that she was literally the mother of all living literally.

[ewq1938]

This is on Day 6, as indicated in Chaper One. God formed the first man.

I prepared a response but then I came to this:

Nor is it a new 'genre' of oriental eipic poetry or tales or myths or any of that certified CRAP.

Don't start confusing me with someone else again.

So, you and all the gappers and day-agers and other deceived individuals who can't just let God be God and the Bible be the Bible need to either open your eyes or ask the Lord to do it for you.

I also need you to stop throwing around false accusations like this if you want to even begin a civil discussion with me or anyone else. This type of behavior is uncalled for and inappropriate.

It's HOW we disagree with each other and HOW we treat each other that will judge us, not our differences in opinion.

I am suspending our discussion until the above is resolved.

[divaD]

The Garden wasn't created on day 6.

So when do you think it was likely created? I've always pretty much went with day 3 myself.

[divaD]

I also need you to stop throwing around false accusations like this if you want to even begin a civil discussion with me or anyone else. This type of behavior is uncalled for and inappropriate.

It's HOW we disagree with each other and HOW we treat each other that will judge us, not our differences in opinion.

I am suspending our discussion until the above is resolved.

Maybe I was wrong. Maybe some really are losing sleep over this. Not meaning you tho, or at least I don't think you're losing sleep over this because some of us are not seeing it your way.

[ewq1938]

So when do you think it was likely created? I've always pretty much went with day 3 myself.

After the day of rest.

[divaD]

After the day of rest.

So then, what it really boils down to, you believe in an 8th day man, so to speak? Would that be correct?