"God called the expanse 'sky.' And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day." Genesis 1:8 (NIV)
So here God is naming the expanse between the atmosphere and the oceans sky. And here the second day ends. Again, it's evening and then morning.
Answers in Genesis summarizes the creation of the atmosphere this way, "Genesis 1 is perfectly worded for what the author wanted to communicate. It says nothing more than God created the sky and its constituent elements, while remaining completely silent about what those elements were. It really depends upon where one starts: if one starts with the presumption of a solid dome, one will read that into the text. However, if one starts with a modern conception of sky, the text permits that understanding as well, and, hence, there is no contradiction."
Friday, May 17, 2013
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Genesis 1:7
"So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so." Genesis 1:7 (NIV)
Again that word "vault" is translated by the QBible as "firmament" or "expanse." In taking a closer look at that word the QBible also states "visible arch of the sky," which goes perfectly with what I concluded with verse 6. This is the atmosphere and oceans being created here.
This is just a continuation of verse 6. In verse 6 God said, "Let's do it this way," and in verse 7 he is doing what he said he would.
Again that word "vault" is translated by the QBible as "firmament" or "expanse." In taking a closer look at that word the QBible also states "visible arch of the sky," which goes perfectly with what I concluded with verse 6. This is the atmosphere and oceans being created here.
This is just a continuation of verse 6. In verse 6 God said, "Let's do it this way," and in verse 7 he is doing what he said he would.
Thursday, May 2, 2013
Genesis 1:6
And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” Genesis 1:6 (NIV)
The QBible translates vaults as an expanse or firmament. So this is where God separated the waters of the oceans and seas from the waters of the skies. I guess the atmosphere was created here.
The only discussion I find on this verse is the discussion of the word "firmament." Many of the scientific community seem to view this as proof that the Bible is unscientific and therefore faulty. In going through the different arguments I don't really understand what there is to argue about, after all, there is a definite division between the oceans and seas and lakes and that of the water in the atmosphere. Wikipedia seems to think that if one were to take this text completely literally you'd believe that there was a "great tent-like ceiling made of solid crystalline-like material." But this is more an issue of how the text is interpreted. Reading this passage , I never got the idea that that is what it meant, in fact, the division seems to be more in the form of the water. Something can easily be something firm without it being a solid structure. We know that there is water in our air (in a different form maybe) but there is a firm distinction from that water and the water we drink. Even the atmosphere surrounding our planet seems pretty firm in that it's not going anywhere.
Many solid substances we consider "firm" can easily change through a chemical reaction just like water. Maybe our meaning of "firm" is just too narrow.
The QBible translates vaults as an expanse or firmament. So this is where God separated the waters of the oceans and seas from the waters of the skies. I guess the atmosphere was created here.
The only discussion I find on this verse is the discussion of the word "firmament." Many of the scientific community seem to view this as proof that the Bible is unscientific and therefore faulty. In going through the different arguments I don't really understand what there is to argue about, after all, there is a definite division between the oceans and seas and lakes and that of the water in the atmosphere. Wikipedia seems to think that if one were to take this text completely literally you'd believe that there was a "great tent-like ceiling made of solid crystalline-like material." But this is more an issue of how the text is interpreted. Reading this passage , I never got the idea that that is what it meant, in fact, the division seems to be more in the form of the water. Something can easily be something firm without it being a solid structure. We know that there is water in our air (in a different form maybe) but there is a firm distinction from that water and the water we drink. Even the atmosphere surrounding our planet seems pretty firm in that it's not going anywhere.
Many solid substances we consider "firm" can easily change through a chemical reaction just like water. Maybe our meaning of "firm" is just too narrow.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Genesis 1:5
"God called the light 'day,' and the darkness he called 'night.' And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day." Genesis 1:5 (NIV)
Here God names the light and darkness he separated. It's curious that evening is listed before morning, we always think of morning being first in a day and evening being last. Did God really order evening as the beginning of a day and morning at the end? Or is this a grammar issue? Apparently many cultures started their days at sunset including the Jews. The Jews, of course, start their days at sunset following God's example from this verse.
I've seen no variations in translations. They all agree with the way this translation reads. The only discussion I really see is whether "the first day" meant an actual physical day or if it was a figurative day. I don't see any reason this couldn't be an actual physical day, after all this is God creating. With him all things are possible. If he had wanted he could've snapped his fingers and caused the universe to come into being, but for whatever reason he took his time. This day may have been longer than a 24-hour-day, I don't understand enough of the science behind it to argue one way or the other, but whatever the case, God is the one that created it.
Here God names the light and darkness he separated. It's curious that evening is listed before morning, we always think of morning being first in a day and evening being last. Did God really order evening as the beginning of a day and morning at the end? Or is this a grammar issue? Apparently many cultures started their days at sunset including the Jews. The Jews, of course, start their days at sunset following God's example from this verse.
I've seen no variations in translations. They all agree with the way this translation reads. The only discussion I really see is whether "the first day" meant an actual physical day or if it was a figurative day. I don't see any reason this couldn't be an actual physical day, after all this is God creating. With him all things are possible. If he had wanted he could've snapped his fingers and caused the universe to come into being, but for whatever reason he took his time. This day may have been longer than a 24-hour-day, I don't understand enough of the science behind it to argue one way or the other, but whatever the case, God is the one that created it.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Genesis 1:4
"God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the
darkness." Genesis 1:4 (NIV)
Here is where something is first called good, and where God separates light and darkness. The Bible Lexicon and the QBible both have the figurative meaning of darkness as misery, destruction, death, wickedness, sorrow, or ignorance. So by separating the light maybe that caused the darkness to be created, since darkness is the absence of light. Perhaps this is when evil came into being. Maybe evil is the absence of good. Not that it can't be purposefully, even light can be blocked or darkness created on purpose.
I don't believe this is saying darkness equals evil, but it could be a symbolism purposely put in the Bible for us to see and use. God does specifically call the light good, but says nothing about the darkness. Really this is a very simple verse that says what it means and means what it says.
Here is where something is first called good, and where God separates light and darkness. The Bible Lexicon and the QBible both have the figurative meaning of darkness as misery, destruction, death, wickedness, sorrow, or ignorance. So by separating the light maybe that caused the darkness to be created, since darkness is the absence of light. Perhaps this is when evil came into being. Maybe evil is the absence of good. Not that it can't be purposefully, even light can be blocked or darkness created on purpose.
I don't believe this is saying darkness equals evil, but it could be a symbolism purposely put in the Bible for us to see and use. God does specifically call the light good, but says nothing about the darkness. Really this is a very simple verse that says what it means and means what it says.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Genesis 1:3
"And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." Genesis 1:3 (NIV)
I like this verse, simple and straight to the point. God said it and it was so. I haven't found anything that disagrees with this translation. In fact everything I find seems to indicate that that's what the original Hebrew meant. It shows the power of the spoken word. It doesn't say he got out his tools and went to work to make light, just that he spoke it into existence.
I like this verse, simple and straight to the point. God said it and it was so. I haven't found anything that disagrees with this translation. In fact everything I find seems to indicate that that's what the original Hebrew meant. It shows the power of the spoken word. It doesn't say he got out his tools and went to work to make light, just that he spoke it into existence.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Genesis 1:2
"Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." Genesis 1:2 (NIV)
Interesting that it's already referring to water while the earth is still formless. It's hard to quite know what to do with this verse. If it's building on verse one it makes sense to me.
An interesting tid bit Bible Lexicon says that the word "formless" is translated from can mean "unreality" which really seems to emphasis the pre-designing of the very molecules of the earth. It gives me the mental picture that it's there (because he created it) but not quite there yet. The "darkness" can also refer to obscurity which flows perfectly with that thought.
Now here's where we get to the waters. It's strange to think that creation has started but the earth has been given no form, but there's already water. But then looking at water, it doesn't really have any form, but takes the form of it's container instead. So maybe when God began he started with water and then created the containers for the waters. This seems to make the most sense to me, but it is difficult to wrap my brain around the whole idea of there just being water - no horizon, no land, no nothing else. BibleArchaeology and GodandScience both seem agree with this assessment.
Every source I find agrees that the original word meant "water." The interesting thing is in the QBible, it also gives a figurative translation of that word as "semen." It's like God telling us that this water is the seed he planted that all creation has grown from. He's setting up the blueprint that he uses over and over again. Living creatures, plants, ideas, etc. start as seeds that grows and mature.
The most important thing to get from this verse is that God was there close by as he created everything. This isn't some hands-off-I'll-check-on-you-when-I-have-nothing-better-to-do sort of God, this is a God that gets up close and personal with his creation, not afraid to get his hands in the mud.
Interesting that it's already referring to water while the earth is still formless. It's hard to quite know what to do with this verse. If it's building on verse one it makes sense to me.
An interesting tid bit Bible Lexicon says that the word "formless" is translated from can mean "unreality" which really seems to emphasis the pre-designing of the very molecules of the earth. It gives me the mental picture that it's there (because he created it) but not quite there yet. The "darkness" can also refer to obscurity which flows perfectly with that thought.
Now here's where we get to the waters. It's strange to think that creation has started but the earth has been given no form, but there's already water. But then looking at water, it doesn't really have any form, but takes the form of it's container instead. So maybe when God began he started with water and then created the containers for the waters. This seems to make the most sense to me, but it is difficult to wrap my brain around the whole idea of there just being water - no horizon, no land, no nothing else. BibleArchaeology and GodandScience both seem agree with this assessment.
Every source I find agrees that the original word meant "water." The interesting thing is in the QBible, it also gives a figurative translation of that word as "semen." It's like God telling us that this water is the seed he planted that all creation has grown from. He's setting up the blueprint that he uses over and over again. Living creatures, plants, ideas, etc. start as seeds that grows and mature.
The most important thing to get from this verse is that God was there close by as he created everything. This isn't some hands-off-I'll-check-on-you-when-I-have-nothing-better-to-do sort of God, this is a God that gets up close and personal with his creation, not afraid to get his hands in the mud.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)