Genesis 1: 1 Commentary

When the world was started by God he made the roof and the base.

By Samuel Owusu (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/9/2011 14:47 pm

Some humor:

“Where should I begin? Um… How about the beginning? Although I suppose I could tell you what happened before the beginning. But then again, I don’t want to take all the mystery out of it. I mean, in this business, if you just put all of your cards on the table, odds are you’re not going to end up with a bestseller.

So let’s just start with the beginning. In the beginning, there was nothing. Kind of like a dark empty region in outer space.

Although there wasn’t any darkness at all.

Or space.

Or time. Wait—maybe there was time. don’t remember—it was such a long time ago.

Anyways, the point is, from nothing, I created something. Why? Uh… just listen to the story and keep your mouth shut.

And from nothing, I created something—as in light, a sky, water, land, plants, a sun, a moon, stars, birds, fish, insects, and animals. (I like variety.) And finally, I made human beings in my own image. (Well—pretty much in my own image. Aside from the fact that I don’t have any toenails. And I’m invisible.)

And that was it. An entire universe. It took me less than a week. In fact, I finished a day early and spent Sunday watching football. —By the way, I started on Monday—) (I’m God—no big deal.)”

(credits: Rodney Ohebsion)

By Dolf (wrote 6 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/9/2011 00:58 am

Thanks Sonam, (post #174)The account mentions the creation of the heavenS (plural) and the earth (our earth) in the beginning. Very often we take it to mean our One heaven and earth. The Genesis 1- then proceeds with some details on the creation of the earth. Nothing more on the heavens and particularly nothing more on our heaven. That there was further creative activity in the heavens (including our heaven) that were created at the time our earth was created is evident from descriptions of our heaven. To dwell on the other heavens. 1.) there is at least one other heaven in addition to ours. 2.) This heaven is similar to ours in the sense that it has a characteristic that defines it as “heaven”. 3.)The time and what GOD created in that other heaven (or in those heavens) is not mentioned and may not be of concern to us. 4.) TIME (concept) applies only to the earth and Time was created for the earth (there was evening and morning- the first day). TIME does not apply even to our heaven not to mention the other heavens.

By Nukwa Yeshua (wrote 7 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/27/2011 02:37 am

Thoughts:

‘Theologians always try to turn the BOOK into a book

WITHOUT COMMON SENSE!”

-G.S. lICHTENBEG, German Physicist, writer
(1742-1799)

By TIUCHE (wrote 2744 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/24/2011 03:12 am

we humans, as great as we are, can not creat ANYTHING! Not even “between our ears”! Just try it sometime, and you’ll soon appreciate the power of true creation from nothing!

By paul Golembiewski (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/23/2011 23:15 pm

Nukwa, what is the basis of your opinion that angels pre-existed Genesis 1:1?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/9/2011 02:23 am

Nukwa, I agree with you that his verse does not refer to the beginning of God himself, but I doubt if it doesn’t refer to “the beginning of the abode of angelic beings”. Angelic being are part of The Heaven. Do you think there were several beginnings?

By Sonam (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/8/2011 23:08 pm

Not the absolute beginning of ALL things. This refers to the beginning of our heavens and our earth. Not the beginning of the abode of angelic beings and certainly not the beginning of GOD.

By Nukwa Yeshua (wrote 7 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/8/2011 21:26 pm

Thanks Elina. You are right. I wasn’t aware about Matthew Henry. The way the posting was presented did make me suspect that it was a published account, and I should have researched it before I made my comments. What threw me off was the signature line, which clearly said “Bible commentary by Matthew Henry”!

I did google “Elina” this time and it seems that you are a genuine, live person

Regardless how famous Matthew Henry was or is, I have very little respect for people who think of others as “fools” just because their opinions differ.

So will the real person who quoted Matthew Henry please own up?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 3/27/2011 20:32 pm

Dear Charles and Don, Matthew Henry is not alive anymore… Don’t worry, he died on 22 June 1714!

“Matthew Henry’s well-known (but not for you, I guess) six-volume Exposition of the Old and New Testaments or Complete Commentary provides an exhaustive verse by verse study of the Bible.”

I’ve to admit I didn’t read all of it. Maybe I should do it in order to have less questions.

By Elina (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 3/27/2011 20:04 pm

The more I mull this topic, the more I do not know. God starts the creation account in extreme generalities in verse 1 and 2. Why the earth is surrounded by water and an abyss of water is a mystery because God never explains this. How did it get to this point? God never explains it. He starts day one by speaking light into the darkness and waste and emptiness of earth, but never explains why earth is in this condition. Also since there were no eye witnesses, a day could be 24 hours and it could be whatever God says a creation day is. It is all supposition to insist on long age days or 24 hour days. We just do not know. By faith we believe that God created the world. And on that we unite.

To call an atheist a fool, does not help the atheist to see spiritually. It is a defensive argument to defeat the atheist emotionally. Atheists can be very haughty and insulting, but I find most of them articulate and with good reasoning abilities. When a atheist supported an argument he had with carbon dating, I could respond on his level and talk about carbon dating intelligently. He listened and then saw how carbon dating had to be calibrated and in any case could not accurately support the so-called millions of years carbon dating was supposed to prove. He agreed with this. So his argument was weakened. Another atheist told me that I could have made different choices and I would still say God had led me. His argument is that we are the product of every choice we have made, and it is ludicrous to say that God led us. To him, anyone can make that claim.

So you see this is an articulate and intelligent man. However, he did not think his argument through. While it is true we have the ability to make choices, these choices are influenced by outside pressures or circumstances, that force us to make the best choice we can within the circumstance we find ourselves in. For the man who trust in the Lord, the steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord. The difference between the atheist and me is faith. I believe; he does not. He is materialistic and has no hope beyond this life. So his very smugness is foolish.

By Don (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 3/26/2011 20:41 pm

Re Post 168:
Despite its length, I read this entire post by Matthew. It is mostly a statement of beliefs and Matthew is certainly entitled to express his beliefs like anybody else. The only one of his beliefs that I have a problem with is that “atheists are the greatest fools”. I have no interest in defending atheists, but I don’t think that Matthew would appreciate being called a fool and therefore he should refrain from calling other people by that term. I for one respect the atheist views as much as I respect Matthew’s and anybody else’s. When someone makes such derogatory terms he discredits no one but himself.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 3/26/2011 19:33 pm

In these verses [1,2 &3] we have the work of creation in its epitome and in its embryo.

I. In its epitome, v. 1, where we find, to our comfort, the first article of our creed, that God the Father Almighty is the Maker of heaven and earth, and as such we believe in him.

1. Observe, in this verse, four things:—

(1.) The effect produced—the heaven and the earth, that is, the world, including the whole frame and furniture of the universe, the world and all things therein, Acts xvii. 24. The world is a great house, consisting of upper and lower stories, the structure stately and magnificent, uniform and convenient, and every room well and wisely furnished. It is the visible part of the creation that Moses here designs to account for; therefore he mentions not the creation of angels. But as the earth has not only its surface adorned with grass and flowers, but also its bowels enriched with metals and precious stones (which partake more of its solid nature and more valuable, though the creation of them is not mentioned here), so the heavens are not only beautified to our eye with glorious lamps which garnish its outside, of whose creation we here read, but they are within replenished with glorious beings, out of our sight, more celestial, and more surpassing them in worth and excellency than the gold or sapphires surpass the lilies of the field. In the visible world it is easy to observe, [1.] Great variety, several sorts of beings vastly differing in their nature and constitution from each other. Lord, how manifold are thy works, and all good! [2.] Great beauty. The azure sky and verdant earth are charming to the eye of the curious spectator, much more the ornaments of both. How transcendent then must the beauty of the Creator be! [3.] Great exactness and accuracy. To those that, with the help of microscopes, narrowly look into the works of nature, they appear far more fine than any of the works of art. [4.] Great power. It is not a lump of dead and inactive matter, but there is virtue, more or less, in every creature: the earth itself has a magnetic power. [5.] Great order, a mutual dependence of beings, an exact harmony of motions, and an admirable chain and connection of causes. [6.] Great mystery. There are phenomena in nature which cannot be solved, secrets which cannot be fathomed nor accounted for. But from what we see of heaven and earth we may easily enough infer the eternal power and Godhead of the great Creator, and may furnish ourselves with abundant matter for his praises. And let our make and place, as men, remind us of our duty as Christians, which is always to keep heaven in our eye and the earth under our feet.

(2.) The author and cause of this great work—GOD. The Hebrew word is Elohim, which bespeaks, [1.] The power of God the Creator. El signifies the strong God; and what less than almighty strength could bring all things out of nothing? [2.] The plurality of persons in the Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This plural name of God, in Hebrew, which speaks of him as many though he is one, was to the Gentiles perhaps a savour of death unto death, hardening them in their idolatry; but it is to us a savour of life unto life, confirming our faith in the doctrine of the Trinity, which, though but darkly intimated in the Old Testament, is clearly revealed in the New. The Son of God, the eternal Word and Wisdom of the Father, was with him when he made the world (Prov. viii. 30), nay, we are often told that the world was made by him, and nothing made without him, John i. 3, 10; Eph. iii. 9; Col. i. 16; Heb. 1. 2. O what high thoughts should this form in our minds of that great God whom we draw nigh to in religious worship, and that great Mediator in whose name we draw nigh!

(3.) The manner in which this work was effected: God created it, that is, made it out of nothing. There was not any pre-existent matter out of which the world was produced. The fish and fowl were indeed produced out of the waters and the beasts and man out of the earth; but that earth and those waters were made out of nothing. By the ordinary power of nature, it is impossible that any thing should be made out of nothing; no artificer can work, unless he has something to work on. But by the almighty power of God it is not only possible that something should be made of nothing (the God of nature is not subject to the laws of nature), but in the creation it is impossible it should be 3 otherwise, for nothing is more injurious to the honour of the Eternal Mind than the supposition of eternal matter. Thus the excellency of the power is of God and all the glory is to him.

(4.) When this work was produced: In the beginning, that is, in the beginning of time, when that clock was first set a going: time began with the production of those beings that are measured by time. Before the beginning of time there was none but that Infinite Being that inhabits eternity. Should we ask why God made the world no sooner, we should but darken counsel by words without knowledge; for how could there be sooner or later in eternity? And he did make it in the beginning of time, according to his eternal counsels before all time. The Jewish Rabbies have a saying, that there were seven things which God created before the world, by which they only mean to express the excellency of these things:—The law, repentance, paradise, hell, the throne of glory, the house of the sanctuary, and the name of the Messiah. But to us it is enough to say, In the beginning was the Word, John i. 1.

2. Let us learn hence, (1.) That atheism is folly, and atheists are the greatest fools in nature; for they see there is a world that could not make itself, and yet they will not own there is a God that made it. Doubtless, they are without excuse, but the god of this world has blinded their minds. (2.) That God is sovereign Lord of all by an incontestable right. If he is the Creator, no doubt he is the owner and possessor of heaven and earth. (3.) That with God all things are possible, and therefore happy are the people that have him for their God, and whose help and hope stand in his name, Ps. cxxi. 2; cxxiv. 8. (4.) That the God we serve is worthy of, and yet is exalted far above, all blessing and praise, Neh. ix. 5, 6. If he made the world, he needs not our services, nor can be benefited by them (Acts xvii. 24, 25), and yet he justly requires them, and deserves our praise, Rev. iv. 11. If all is of him, all must be to him.

II. Here is the work of creation in its embryo, v. 2, where we have an account of the first matter and the first mover.

1. A chaos was the first matter. It is here called the earth (though the earth, properly taken, was not made till the third day v. 10), because it did most resemble that which afterwards was called earth, mere earth, destitute of its ornaments, such a heavy unwieldy mass was it; it is also called the deep, both for its vastness and because the waters which were afterwards separated from the earth were now mixed with it. This immense mass of matter was it out of which all bodies, even the firmament and visible heavens themselves, were afterwards produced by the power of the Eternal Word. The Creator could have made his work perfect at first, but by this gradual proceeding he would show what is, ordinarily, the method of his providence and grace. Observe the description of this chaos. (1.) There was nothing in it desirable to be seen, for it was without form and void. Tohu and Bohu, confusion and emptiness; so these words are rendered, Isa. xxxiv. 11. It was shapeless, it was useless, it was without inhabitants, without ornaments, the shadow or rough draught of things to come, and not the image of the things, Heb. x. 1. The earth is almost reduced to the same condition again by the sin of man, under which the creation groans. See Jer. iv. 23, I beheld the earth, and lo it was without form, and void. To those who have their hearts in heaven this lower world, in comparison with that upper, still appears to be nothing but confusion and emptiness. There is no true beauty to be seen, no satisfying fulness to be enjoyed, in this earth, but in God only. (2.) If there had been any thing desirable to be seen, yet there was no light to see it by; for darkness, thick darkness, was upon the face of the deep. God did not create this darkness (as he is said to create the darkness of affliction, Isa. xlv. 7), for it was only the want of light, which yet could not be said to be wanted till something was made that might be seen by it; nor needs the want of it be much complained of, when there was nothing to be seen but confusion and emptiness. If the work of grace in the soul is a new creation, this chaos represents the state of an unregenerate graceless soul: there is disorder, confusion, and every evil work; it is empty of all good, for it is without God; it is dark, it is darkness itself. This is our condition by nature, till almighty grace effects a blessed change.

2. The Spirit of God was the first mover: He moved upon the face of the waters. When we consider the earth without form and void, methinks it is like the valley full of dead and dry bones. Can these live? Can this confused mass of matter be formed into a beautiful world? Yes, if a spirit of life from God enter into it, Ezek. xxxvii. 9. Now there is hope concerning this thing; for the Spirit of God begins to work, and, if he work, who or what shall hinder? God is said to make the world by his Spirit, Ps. xxxiii. 6; Job xxvi. 13; and by the same mighty worker the new creation is effected. He moved upon the face of the deep, as Elijah stretched himself upon the dead child,—as the hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and hovers over them, to warm and cherish them, Matt. xxiii. 37,—as the eagle stirs up her nest, and flutters over her young (it is the same word that is here used), Deut. xxxii. 11. Learn hence, That God is not only the author of all being, but the fountain of life and spring of motion. Dead matter would be for ever dead if he did not quicken it. And this makes it credible to us that God should raise the dead. That power which brought such a world as this out of confusion, emptiness, and darkness, 4 at the beginning of time, can, at the end of time, bring our vile bodies out of the grave, though it is a land of darkness as darkness itself, and without any order (Job x. 22), and can make them glorious bodies.

-Matthew Henry commentaries
-Taken from the Matthew Henry concordance

By Matthew Henry (wrote 3 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 3/26/2011 15:33 pm

John, this is a response to the first part of your post 165 where you quoted the verse “No one comes to the Father except through me” and said this about it: “As a Christian, to disregard what Jesus stated as a simple fact is to call Jesus a liar. In being the perfect man, Jesus was not capable of telling a lie or even misdirecting or tricking people by His words.”

There are several things to consider here. First, we don’t really know what Jesus said because (a) The original books of the Bible are not available and all we have are copies that have been doctored over the centuries; and (b) Any quotation attributed to Jesus was not written by Jesus himself but by writers several decades after the fact and thus may have been changed or even made up. Ever wondered why only John and no other gospel writer quotes this? Ever considered that the writer of John was most probably not even born when Jesus purportedly said these words?

Second, if despite what I just wrote we are to believe that the words we see in today’s copies of the Bible are really God’s words, then we would have to follow EVERY word of the Bible, not just the ones that suit us. As an example, you wouldn’t be a good Christian unless you supported the killing of all those who have homosexual relationships and all those who work on the Sabbath. I don’t want to put words in your mouth but my guess is that you consider yourself a good Christian even if you don’t follow such Bible mandates word for word.

Third, there is no such thing as a “perfect man”. Either Jesus was a man subject to all the temptations and indiscretions that we all are or he wasn’t. If he was a flesh-and-blood man any imperfection that he might have been done or uttered would not have made him a liar.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 2/23/2011 21:49 pm

John, I have two responses for your post 165. The first thing that struck me is that you condemn three-quarters of the world’s population to hell (“all other religions are void and useless attempts to reach Heaven”). Many Muslims have the same idea: that one can reach heaven only through Mohamed. These people even consider non-Muslims to be inferior humans and, thus, fair game to be killed. Which is what the Spanish conquistadors thought when they massacred all those very religious but non-Christian people in Central and South America. Such exclusionist views on both sides have led to nothing but bloody wars and dreadful brutality. They are certainly not religions of love.

Religion is a cultural as well as a political phenomenon. In olden times, when people did not communicate much with each other, every tribe had its own religion and its own god or gods. Eventually tribes and then nations started to conquer one another and in many cases religions spread together with new laws and customs. Christianity became the religion of the Roman Empire not because it was necessarily the right one but because Constantine said so and people had no choice but to follow their leader. European conquests then took Christianity to the Americas, the Pacific, and Africa. Meanwhile Islam spread east, also mostly by the sword. Thank God (if that’s the right one to thank) Hinduism and Buddhism were spread by much more peaceful means. Regardless of how cultures and religions spread people tend to follow their customs and respect their traditions. Today the descendants of Christian and Muslim converts are brainwashed in favor of Jesus and Mohamed since they are tiny tots and are taught little or nothing about Buddha or Krishna. The opposite is true in much of Asia. People do not choose where to be born. You can’t condemn a whole culture just because its indoctrination is different from yours.

I do not wish in any way to infringe upon your beliefs. I just would like to ask you to be less parochial. If you were born in India or Mindanao your beliefs would be different and you wouldn’t want some “void and useless” westerner to tell you that you’re damned.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 2/23/2011 21:46 pm

Charles, thank you for your comments. To be precise, I wrote, “With God, through Jesus Christ, death is just a doorway to Heaven.” Respectfully, we cannot water it down to just “faith”. Jesus stated, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me,” John 14:6. As a Christian, to disregard what Jesus stated as a simple fact is to call Jesus a liar. In being the perfect man, Jesus was not capable of telling a lie or even misdirecting or tricking people by His words. It’s not just faith in Jesus (because even the demons know the name and connotation of Jesus), but faith that Jesus’ blood has cleansed our sins and in addition to providing a way to God the Father, and Heaven, the knowledge of eternal life in and through Him. One can and should deduce, if Jesus is the only way to God the Father (i.e., Heaven), then all other religions are void and useless attempts to reach Heaven. One can live a good life and not be a Christian. But when their time on earth has run its course; unless they profess the name of Jesus, ask for God’s forgiveness of their own personal sins, and claim Jesus’ blood as their saving grace, then, there will be no Heaven for them. It’s sad to say, but many will perish away.

By John (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 2/21/2011 22:56 pm

John, you are right in saying that the doorway to heaven can only be reached through faith. Science certainly doesn’t take us there. I am afraid that’s why many people profess faith in God (or Gods) and in heaven: because they don’t want to be deprived of that comfort. I don’t want to believe in God because I need such comfort. I want to believe in God only if that is the real truth. A false comfort does nothing for me.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 2/21/2011 11:29 am

Charles, I enjoy reading your take on everything related to the God’s Holy Word. It’s good to think on these things. I have not read you postings at length, but agree that man simply cannot read or interpret God’s mind. If we could, why would we need God or His Holy Word? There’s no way we can thoroughly understand Him, for He has infinite wisdom and knowledge. I like it that way. I’m not vain enough to wish for God’s knowledge. What I do pray for is His direction and companionship in my life. Along these same lines, science is a wonderful field to study and discovery occurs every day. However, to put all my trust in science will in the end, get me nowhere. I believe the Holy Scriptures were inspired by the Holy Spirit and I am yet to see anyone point out where science has corrected the Holy Bible. With God, through Jesus Christ, death is just a doorway to Heaven. With science, death is, well it’s just plain death.

By John Gohn (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 2/17/2011 17:40 pm

Genesis is a book about beginnings, the creation of everything. Anybody who wants to know God must first know that He is the Creator, the Maker of everything we see. Although, the first verse was not fully explained in details, it must be absorbed and be taken with Faith and by Faith. Even the writer of this book had not seen the creation, it is by faith also that He wrote it as the Holy Spirit inspired him (Moses). The creation is the physical manifestation of the existence of God, his Power is manifested in his creation. God is introduced here as the Creator of everything, the heaven and earth and everything in it.

By ernie (wrote 5 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/3/2010 16:17 pm

Don

A couple of comments about your post 160.

You rightly point out that Exodus confirms what Genesis tells us, i.e. that the entire creation happened over a course of 6 days and that a day is composed of a period of darkness and a period of light (the evening and the morning). You also noted that the bible des not specify how long a day was. This is true, but the bible does indicate that the universe was created about 6,000 years ago and we know that 6,000 years ago a day was just about as long as it is today. (And we also know that Earth and the universe have in reality been around much longer than 6,000 years – but that’s another argument!)

You also said, “The majority of the creation was done in the dark until we see the barren and empty earth covered with an abyss of water and darkness.” I disagree. The universe consists of millions upon millions of stars and planets, and all of these were created later. The only thing that was created in darkness was one little planet.

Finally you reiterated what several people have said on this forum, i.e. the light which was created on the first day was not solar. You call it God’s light, others have insisted it was Jesus or tried to explain it as some mysterious form of energy… The bible doesn’t specify what kind of light it was. What the bible tells us is that after the creation of light Earth started to have evenings and mornings, i.e. it started to revolve on its axis and thus receive SOLAR light during the day. Many people can’t accept this logical conclusion because it would mean that God created the sun twice (He again creates the sun in the fourth day of creation, Genesis 1:14-16). But two wrongs don’t make a right.

Charles

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 11/29/2010 14:11 pm

Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 tells us that God created the heavens and the earth in six days. By faith I believe that. How long each day was is not specified. A day has this component: darkness and light. Until light was introduced, there were no days. Once light was introduced the first day was recorded: So the evening and the morning were the first day. The evening precedes the morning. The majority of the creation was done in the dark until we see the barren and empty earth covered with an abyss of water and darkness. That is what becomes the first evening when light is introduced. And the light was not solar light; it was God’s light. So this day is comprised of a dark period unspecified but filled with the majority of creation, and light that is not solar light, ends the first day. So the days are whatever God says they are, and He did not reveal that to us. Augustine called those days, God’s special days. The main thing is we meekly believe what God has revealed. One observation: Satan lied to Eve. You shall not die. That is the same lie Satan is telling the world today. You shall not die. God says, the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord.

By Don (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 11/29/2010 11:50 am

“O (Joshua), keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:” (1Timothy 6:20)

By Jason W. Elder (wrote 314 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/22/2010 19:53 pm

Joshua

In post 157 you put a devoted defence for your argument that, despite its lack of scientific knowledge, the Bible was still inspired by an omniscient God. I think what you’re saying is that God knew things about the universe that He didn’t deem fit or necessary to inspire the authors of the Bible with. In other words He misled them and trapped them into committing errors.

If that’s the case, far from convincing me that “Genesis HAS TO HAVE BEEN inspired by an almighty and omniscient God” the only conclusion is that we cannot trust the Bible as a source of truth.

If you look through this post you will find other instances of people trying to defend the legitimacy of the creation story despite its obvious flaws. You’re not the first to try to enter God’s mind in an effort to find excuses for the glaring inaccuracies of Genesis. You and I don’t know what was in God’s mind when the Bible was written. You and I don’t even know what was written in Genesis, because the originals don’t exist any more. We can only comment on what the current versions of Genesis say, and what they say is inconsistent with scientific knowledge.

Charles

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/22/2010 19:01 pm

Charles,
I think I understand your position. I have an opinion of my own which I hope contributes to this argument. I mainly want to address comment 153. You stated that, “…the writers of Genesis lacked the most basic knowledge of the universe and therefore Genesis could not have been inspired by an almighty and omniscient God.” I would like the pose the perspective that despite their lack of knowledge of the universe, they demonstrated knowledge. They themselves hadn’t the means of accessing such knowledge except through divine revelation. God inspired the Bible. The knowledge was from Him and not from the man. If I could re-write your comment I would have said, “the writers of Genesis lacked the most basic knowledge of the universe and therefore Genesis HAS TO HAVE BEEN have been inspired by an almighty and omniscient God.” To say that the scripture is limited to the knowledge of man is to diminish the power, divinity and sovereignty of God.

By Joshua Lucius Bruyning (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/1/2010 19:02 pm

At a new point of awareness the soul started to be creative in its expressions.

By Michael (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 8/21/2010 07:02 am

Hey Javier, I apologize for the bluntness in my message below. I have two issues with your post and I don’t know how to get them across in any better way.

1. I find it presumptuous of people who think they can interpret God’s intentions. If Genesis was inspired by God then I’d have to accept it as it is inspired, i.e. as it is written. You keep trying to teach us “how God meant his word to be” (Post 152) and “what God intended it to be” (Post 154). Excuse me, but where did you get this gift of reading God’s mind?

2. You are getting into this faith-versus-science argument in which you assume that science is trying to arrive at some anti-Biblical conclusions and that it has mud on its face because of all these so-called “gaps”. This view of science is totally wrong. Science is not the antithesis of religion. Charles Darwin, for one, was a religious man who certainly did not set out to disprove any Christian teachings. He was simply in search of knowledge, as all of us should be.

Faith is by definition a belief in something for which there is no proof. There is nothing wrong with faith, but newfound knowledge may from time to time disprove some of our long-held beliefs. When this happens some of us choose to embrace the truth, as Darwin did, while others choose to ignore the truth and live in denial.

Science is not faith. Believing in the big bang or any other unproven theory is faith, but respecting the scientific process and its logical conclusions is not faith. It is reality.

I don’t know how the universe was created. Maybe there was a big bang, and maybe not. What I do know is that the Genesis version of creation is not only full of “gaps” but also chockfull of flaws. And God does not inspire flaws.

By Charles Fiott (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/28/2010 01:50 am

Re post 153 - Hey Charles, as for genesis being a solid clincher for creation, I agree with you; it’s certainly not a blue print, but rather a quick synopsis for creation. I do believe God intended it to be that way for without faith it is impossible to please God. I have come to a realization that God did not inspire the book of genesis to prove his existence, but rather to let us know there is a complicated force behind all of creation. However, there is a scientific theory that does support genesis’s explanation; the Big Bang theory does suggests that the universe can be traced to a single point. I’m not a biologist or scientist, but I do know that there are many views depending on which scientist you talk to; not all scientist are on one accord when it comes to creation. The fact is that even today science is faced with many gaps and by leaving God out, many claims can be stretched against the biblical account for creation. Therefore, It’s evident for any belief one chooses to embrace, whether biblical or scientific, both require an enormous amount of faith. I respectfully accept anyone’s views on creation as an matter of where we place our faith. I certainly do not judge or convict anyone opposing my faith for that is not my job but that of God the creator: for those who doubts his very existence, this statement is no cause to be alarmed. As for me, at one point in my life I was a skeptical on the existence of God, but life’s curves and through age maturity I realized that whichever view I choose to believe, ultimately its basis is faith. Yes, there is evidence to support some of science theories, but there are also many gaps, so I choose not to focus on every detail that may or may not be, I rather focus on the creator him self.

By Javier Cavazos (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/23/2010 19:05 pm

Re post 152 - Dear Javier, I respect your opinion that there is a creating force behind everything and that this creative force may be God, but I don’t think it addresses my argument. What I’m saying is that the writers of Genesis lacked the most basic knowledge of the universe and therefore Genesis could not have been inspired by an almighty and omniscient God. Trying to get the story of creation from Genesis is like trying to learn a language from someone who doesn’t know how to read or write.

By Charles Fiott (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/22/2010 23:10 pm

Here is a response to post # 148 so as to challenge the concept that assigns no creator to the Heavens and Earth;. throughout all of our existence; all that has been made, considering only that which is “man made”, nothing has been made without a driving force behind it. For instance, the ancient Mayans built these huge pyramids that to this day intrigue us all to say wow what a driving force for creation. How were they able to build such complicated structures without the help of domesticated animals and most puzzling without the invention of the wheel? Henry Ford is credited as the creator of the automobile and the Wright brothers known for the creation of the ability for Humans to fly. I can continue but, you should by now know where I’m going with this. Let me ask you, what can you use as proof that was man made that did not have a driving force advocating its existence? To my knowledge, nothing has been made by man without someone willing it to be or actually doing it themselves. So I believe man made creation to be but a mere glimpse of a picture of how creation works. I’m not here to argue that science has it totally wrong because they may be correct on some of their finding. I am however, pointing out the fact that whether thru the process of scientific theory’s or other explanations; if we look for evidence into our own Human creation, it always points to a creating force behind it. I believe God to be that force for the Heavens and Earth and until someone can point to a man made creation that just appeared into existence, only until then will I ever toy with the idea of the creation of nature as just being a coincidence with no driving force behind it. As for the Word of God it is not complicated yet it is not easy to understand, and that’s why we find it confusing and questionable. However that is how God meant his word to be, for if it was easy as the book by Dr. Seuss Green Eggs and Ham there would be no need for God to ask that we seek and search his word.

By Javier Cavazos (wrote 2 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/22/2010 22:07 pm

The Christians belive the Bible to be the word of God and therefor take it to be true. If it is man’s fault to interpret and understand it correctly,why God and His word be blamed for it?

Man has shed blood not only for his religious beliefs, but for his struggle for powers, propoerty, women etc. How can I discard truth for reasons of man’s faults?

By Jayant Christian (wrote 287 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/21/2010 01:47 am