The Genesis Account and How it Refutes Creationism

Genesis means the origin or formation of something. So this forum Origins deals with genesis, the origin, obviously of us.

Creationism is a radical fundamentalist view of Scripture found in what is known as the Holy Bible.

The Holy Bible, or I prefer Holy Scriptures, contain 66 books. The first one is called Genesis. And the very first chapter gives the origin the explanation of the origin of life.

Fundamentalists take it literally, and spread their doctrine far and wide.

People who understand science know they are wrong. They also mistakenly think that everyone believing in the Holy Scriptures therefore, must be a Creationist who believes in Creationism.

Creationism is the idea that Genesis chapter 1 shows us that the entire universe and the earth and life all were created in six literal days, about 6,000 years ago. Therefore, if you believe in the Genesis account you must be a Creationist who believes in Creationism.

This is a conspiracy site. And I can tell you, that this conspiracy to hide the truth goes much deeper than almost any other.

There are 10's of millions of people who believe in the Genesis account, among many scientists, that still agree with science, and are NOT creationists and do not believe in creationism, and understand the Bible does not espouse the ideas behind it.

How is this possible?

For you Creationists, you need to put on your seat-belts. Because this explanation of the Genesis account is going to rock you. For you atheists, and people who believe in evolution, you too need to clear your mind of the propaganda being fed you.

If you do not, and come here with an ulterior motive and an agenda, this will not help.

The Genesis account. How life started. Almost everyone knows what Genesis 1:1 states. It says: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

This states a fundamental truth. Our universe had a beginning. There are people who are not aware that cosmologists have proven that the universe came from a first cause. That it is not eternal. That is because of the background radiation found, as well as other things, such as the red shift, meaning things are moving away from each other outwards (it is much more complicated than this, but it is easily enough stated as such).

All other theories of the universe and multi-universes have no basis in reality or can be proven. The fact is that the universe did have an origin and began at a certain point, cosmologists say was about 13.8 billion years ago is pretty much agreed upon. It may be wrong and may be adjusted. Human science is fickle that way.

So now we come to the Genesis account. What does it really say? Like we all know Creationism teaches that it says that the entire universe was created in 6 literal 24 hour periods of time. Is that correct?

No. First of all the word day can mean a number of things. It does not just refer to a 24 hour literal day on earth. In fact in Genesis chapter 2 we are told that God created everything in a "day":

(Genesis 2:4) . . .This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.

If, as the scientists claim, the universe is 13.8 billion years old, how could it be a "day?" Of course we know the answer from the Holy Scriptures. It tells us that the Creator is immortal and never had a beginning. So in his viewpoint, 13 billion years is not really that much. But still, that is not what this means. It just means that the word day can encompass a variety of things.

For example, if you said: "In my father's day," what are you referring to? Is it not a period of time? And not a single day?

Good know that you understand that much we will now delve into the wonderful account of creation in Genesis 1.

(I am writing this and may run out of room so please refrain from commenting until it is done, I will reserve the next post as I am sure I will need it to finish this post).

What Does the Genesis Account Teach?

I doubt that many people reading this have actually taken the time to read the Genesis account and meditate on it. And if you have, most likely you have been taught what it must mean and what it is saying. To those who believe in Creationism, you haven't taken the time to really study it have you? To those who believe in evolution, you really don't know what it is saying do you?

This is for everyone. Not just atheists, not just people who believe in evolution. Not just creationists. It is for everyone. That is why this OP has taken so long to get to this point. I have spend decades talking with so many people I can imagine many of the objections you will bring up. Not all, obviously. But the previous should help with a lot of it.

Let us start:

Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

When the beginning started, in the beginning, God created everything.

This statement dos show us the universe had a start at a certain time in the distant past. And it shows us the cause of the universe is God. Heavens refers to the universe here.

Now there is no time-table set on this statement. We are not shown how long ago that happened. No doubt galaxies were formed, and stars, including Red Super Giants that are so giant they only last millions of years. Then they explode. During a process at the end of their lives, which would take too much space here to explain, as they run out of fuel, the start fusing lighter atoms into heavier and heavier ones, until finally they blow up in a Supernova explosion.

Our solar system comes from one such Supernova. For all of the elements found in it, the heavier elements needed for life (such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, etc) are only formed in the cores of these dying stars.

So we know that hundreds of millions of years, perhaps billions have already past before the formation of our solar system, according to science.

As the sun formed so did our earth around it, as well as our moon as all of the planets. Our earth as it cooled, was no doubt for a time was just a sea of molten lava and volcanoes. But still time past, and at a certain point water filled the earth's surface. Some speculate that was do to comet collisions full of H20 that filled the earth with water.

Others see that even the very foundation of the earth is made of H20, and that there is more water stored in the earth's core than in all of the Ocean's of the world.

However it came to be, the volcanoes died down, and the earth's surface eventually was filled with water. (If anyone doubts this, just look at the earth from space.) Where is all that water now? Well it is stored in the north and south poles. In fact scientists estimate that if all of the ice on earth melted the entire earth would be flooded with water, even to the highest point of the mountains.

So we come to this point in the universes existence. What does the Genesis account reveal?

It is not dealing with the creation of the physical universe, heaven and earth. For all of that was dealt with in verse 1 of chapter 1.

Have you ever heard of Terraforming? The idea has been around for a long time. This account shows us how God "terraforms" earth for life, for human life. I put that into quotations because it is a figure of speech.

Ran out of room....

continued...

The Genesis Account

Vs 2:

"Now the earth was formless and desolate, and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep, and God’s active force was moving about over the surface of the waters."

So from the time the universe, and then the earth was created, sometime in the far distant future from this, we arrive at a time on earth. Let the reader be transformed there. He is not in heaven, he is not looking down on the earth. He is on the earth's surface.

Can you imagine that? At this point where we start in the Genesis account the earth's surface is a big ocean, from one side to the other. And it was desolate and formless. Of course it is desolate. There is no life in the water, there is no land. It is just a big ocean of water.

Now if you were to look heavenward what would you see? There was darkness. No light! So let us go to the next verse to help us see what happens:

(Genesis 1:3-5) . . .And God said: “Let there be light.” Then there was light.  After that God saw that the light was good, and God began to divide the light from the darkness.  God called the light Day, but the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, a first day.

So at the point in verse 2, it was not light. it was dark.

Why would the earth's surface be dark? Does that mean the sun did not exist? If you believe in science you know that is absurd. Rather we must come to the logical conclusion that the earth's atmosphere was so thick with gases the light from the sun did not penetrate to the surface.

If you read verse two again it says that the surface was just water, and at that time God's active force began to move to and fro over the surface. That process, whatever it was, began to clear up the atmosphere enough for the light from the sun to penetrate to the earth's surface. Not that the sun was visible, but that light from it became visible.

The more times you read this account the more you see, while very very simple in its explanation, how highly detailed it really is.

Now that light could penetrate the earth's atmosphere to the surface, to the water what happens?

We are told:

(Genesis 1:6-8) . . .Then God said: “Let there be an expanse between the waters, and let there be a division between the waters and the waters.”  Then God went on to make the expanse and divided the waters beneath the expanse from the waters above the expanse. And it was so.  God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

God's active force created a division between the waters and the waters. He put a water canopy in the sky, in our atmosphere. This took a lot of the water from earth's surface. And he made a division between the ocean on the surface and the expanse of water in the sky.

What happens next?

(Genesis 1:9-13) . . .Then God said: “Let the waters under the heavens be collected together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, but the collecting of the waters, he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said: “Let the earth cause grass to sprout, seed-bearing plants and fruit trees according to their kinds, yielding fruit along with seed on the earth.” And it was so. 12 And the earth began to produce grass, seed-bearing plants and trees yielding fruit along with seed, according to their kinds. Then God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.

So as the water was gathered into the expanse and separated from the water on the surface dry land began to appear. The dry land was called Earth. And the oceans of water were called Seas.

At this point the process which would produce oxygen in the atmosphere was produced. The creation of plants, both in the sea and on dry land and trees. This is very important. Because these plants could not live without the sun, and they could not use the sun's light that causes photosynthesis in them, to produce oxygen in the atmosphere. (Photosynthesis is the process where plants use certain light rays to separate water molecules and release oxygen into the atmosphere, this is a very simplistic explanation of the process).

What happens next in the Genesis of life?

(Genesis 1:14-19) . . .Then God said: “Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night, and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years. 15 They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God went on to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. 17 Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth 18 and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

Does this mean that God just made the stars including the sun? That would be impossible, for we know that already happened in verse one. And we know the sun is needed for plant life to exist in the third creative day.

If you were on earth's surface though. Finally the atmosphere has cleared enough so that the sun and the moon and the stars became visible. It was no longer shrouded in darkness, nor in a thick atmosphere.

Do you see how the Genesis account is accurate and shows us how God "terraformed" our earth, even though terra means earth. He was the originator of the idea. And had the means and the power to do so.

The next verses of the Genesis account I will not quote. But they state that God then created sea life and the birds. And then he created animal life on land, and divided the animals into domestic and wild animals. Meaning animals to live a part from humans. And animals that were to live domesticated, for and with humans.

Then finally at the end God created man.

All of this can be proven by the fossil record. It shows that first plant life and trees appeared. Then sea life, then land life, and finally humans.

None of it breaks with science. None of it.

And what sets us apart from all other creation? the Genesis account states:

(Genesis 1:26) . . .Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness. . .

Yes, God created man with the likeness of the gods. of Himself and the angels in otherwords. The ability to think. To love, with wisdom

a reply to: LifeisGrand

Post reserved for OP. I don't know if I need this one. But just in case.

a reply to: LifeisGrand

Going to great lengths to prove what exactly?

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: LifeisGrand

Going to great lengths to prove what exactly?

From his tone, I think he may be trying to say it all just "happened" Somehow, without a creator, even though everything follows laws and is designed to be subject to laws. but no creator. He refers to anyone who believes in "creation" as a radical fundamentalist view.

Whoa..
That reveals a serious attitude issue in my opinion.

a reply to: LifeisGrand

The early passages of the Genesis are not necessarily wrong at all but they are perhaps the most heavily abridged text in the known universe.

God created the Heaven's (the universe) and the earth (which formed after the majority of the universe)
He rested on the seventh day (does not say he stopped creating or that the earth is the only planet)

Have you heard of the Pre Adamite theory's, it was severely tainted as a theory because Slaver traders latched onto it to support there evil trade in human lives by claiming that the people they sold were not son's of Adam so had no soul's and were of pre adamite origin but that aside it is interesting.

And the Earth was Formless and Void is only one translation, the other is THE EARTH WAS BARREN AND DESOLATE as if after a terrible war or cataclysm, there may have been survivor's, pre adamites and of course who did adam's kid's marry?.

Let us create them in our image, so human's were created by HUMAN's, an older race whom are perhaps the origin of the Angel's while God is the supreme creator and father over all, what they did was by extension his doing and the soul within them is the spirit of God the breath of life that made there inner being live, without it they were merely intelligence animal's, people of clay, dust to dust but that soul is breath of life, spirit from the living god the supreme creator, god is a spirit said Jesus, Spirit to Spirit.

Indeed to be blessed by the holy spirit is to have that breath of life restored which adam lost when he was made mortal for his sin, jesus send's the holy spirit the comforter, the lord and giver of LIFE.

Of course we are both being revisionist here and there are many creationists whom could talk the best sceptic's under the table (even though they would both argue till they were blue in the face or red in some cases) with actual fact's, it is merely interpretation of the data and minutia we are talking about, the New testamant is what matters, the past is were the root's are planted but it is were we grow from there that matters and what fruit we bare not how deep the soil really is below what we are using, Peter is your rock chosen and mortared by the blood of Christ so keep your house built on him.

originally posted by: LifeisGrand


***snip***

If you do not, and come here with an ulterior motive and an agenda, this will not help.

***snip***

So now we come to the Genesis account. What does it really say? Like we all know Creationism teaches that it says that the entire universe was created in 6 literal 24 hour periods of time. Is that correct?

No. First of all the word day can mean a number of things. It does not just refer to a 24 hour literal day on earth. In fact in Genesis chapter 2 we are told that God created everything in a "day":

(Genesis 2:4) . . .This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.

Your whole text is based on semantics.

In the Danish Bible the text from Genesis 2:4 is this:
"v4 Det var himlens og jordens skabelseshistorie."

Transleted into something you'd understand (english) is is this:

"Verse 4 That was the story of the creation of the heaven and the earth."

Or maybe
" That was the tale of the creation of the sky and earth."

Or maybe
"Such is the history of the creation of heaven and earth."

Take your pick, but know that as soon as you have done that, you have chosen YOUR path. Not mine. Or his. Or her.

Whatever else, the Danish version of the bible gives us absolutely NO REASON to think that it would mean anything like "In the day of my father" or around the time of his life.
NONE.

What does strike me is that as time goes by we get better and better at translating a language that was written down by people with an agenda thousands of years ago.

Thank you all so far for replying. Please read the second post it was added now.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Agreed they are abridged. That is because the Holy Scriptures are meant to be a means for salvation, not a scientific textbook.

When God was talking to his son when he said: "Let us make man in our imagine" he was still talking to another invisible spirit like him though. That does not prove he was talking to himself or to another human.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: LifeisGrand

Going to great lengths to prove what exactly?

Greetings.

originally posted by: LifeisGrand
a reply to: LABTECH767

Agreed they are abridged. That is because the Holy Scriptures are meant to be a means for salvation, not a scientific textbook.

When God was talking to his son when he said: "Let us make man in our imagine" he was still talking to another invisible spirit like him though. That does not prove he was talking to himself or to another human.

In much the same way as when we are told that God walked in the Garden of Eden and called out for Adam "where are you", doesn't imply that God is a physical being or even less than omniscient.

a reply to: LifeisGrand

Correct but to provide an alternative view I felt was necessary, I actually believe genesis but in my own way, don't know that I am correct but like the old saying goes it is a matter of faith, I also believe the earth is about 4.6 billion years old and the sun about 5 billion, indeed in my mind the earth may have hosted many worlds in that time.

Then our knowledge of dating may also be radically imprecise, the theory of predicable decay may be wrong as the idea of Brane theory may have thrown a quantum spanner into the work's of linear science, the very law's of the universe including radioactive decay rate, time itself, gravity and the relationship between these law's may be in a constant and changable state of flux, our current law's of physic's may therefore be in flux and behave differently relaive to time and location in the universe as the quantum branes interact in superspace.

Sorry if you don't know brain theory it is an alternative and also marriagable to string theory.

Then there are studies on rapid fossilization of wood which can petrify in less then a hundred years in some circumstance's as well which also if the radio active dating is unreliable and isotopic analysis is shown to be potentially flawed mean's the whole age of the earth could actually also be far younger than that 4 billion years mark, I know that God is there but my science come's from man so who do I choose, God who is there or man who get's it wrong all the time with me being a prime example of that.

a reply to: HolgerTheDane2

I would never suggest God is less than God, so don't get me wrong on that, He is there and is most certainly aware, we are just hypothesizing or if you like philosophizing on the point's and most certainly not trying to rewrite them, every one that read's it see's it a little different and some have the holy spirit open there eye's to new understanding's but I don't think that is what is going on here so just a discussion on a theme rather than a debate or argument.

originally posted by: HolgerTheDane2

originally posted by: LifeisGrand
a reply to: LABTECH767

Agreed they are abridged. That is because the Holy Scriptures are meant to be a means for salvation, not a scientific textbook.

When God was talking to his son when he said: "Let us make man in our imagine" he was still talking to another invisible spirit like him though. That does not prove he was talking to himself or to another human.

In much the same way as when we are told that God walked in the Garden of Eden and called out for Adam "where are you", doesn't imply that God is a physical being or even less than omniscient.

No indeed for Scripture shows us God is invisible and a spirit:

(1 Timothy 1:17) 17 Now to the King of eternity, incorruptible, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

In fact it is highly unlikely God himself talked with Adam. His son, now known as Jesus Christ was God's word, or spokesman for God:

(Revelation 19:13) . . .and he is clothed with an outer garment stained with blood, and he is called by the name The Word of God.

I kinda wonder how you know your truth is right and everyone else is wrong

Genesis the book is not a scientific document, why treat it as one

Also I note you take English words and comment without understanding their original Hebrew root word

Also other things you say, wow, wild assumption, dare I say outlandish. You made up your own history based on nothing in the end

originally posted by: Raggedyman
I kinda wonder how you know your truth is right and everyone else is wrong

Genesis the book is not a scientific document, why treat it as one

Also I note you take English words and comment without understanding their original Hebrew root word

Also other things you say, wow, wild assumption, dare I say outlandish. You made up your own history based on nothing in the end

If you are wondering about the Hebrew word for day. You are wrong. I know it. It is yohm. And it is used in a literal and also symbolic term in Scriptures.

None of this is assupmtion. It all takes into account what verse 2 of chapter 1 of Genesis states. And without knowing science it tell us all of this. It was written thousands of years ago, before modern science. I didn't make this up.


.

a reply to: TechniXcality

Greetings again. What do you want to be proved?

Why do people still believe in the bible when there's so much scientific evidence that it is all BS. I grew up forced into religion, iv read the bible several times and to me its just as believable as reading a harry potter book. Its been edited so many times that its nothing like the original anyway so how can people trust what they read?

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

He refers to anyone who believes in "creation" as a radical fundamentalist view.

That was the first point I loaded in my quiver . There were others later on but I decided to skip to the comment section after the first page .It was starting to sound like a infomercial ......OP did leave some options in the could be's and may have been's but with the radical label in the beginning of the post and so many other lesser points in between they may be on a mission .

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

He refers to anyone who believes in "creation" as a radical fundamentalist view.

That was the first point I loaded in my quiver . There were others later on but I decided to skip to the comment section after the first page .It was starting to sound like a infomercial ......OP did leave some options in the could be's and may have been's but with the radical label in the beginning of the post and so many other lesser points in between they may be on a mission .

Perhaps to save you. You need to reread it and ponder on the points.