Re: extra stuff

From: allenroy (allenroy@peoplepc.com)
Date: Sat Oct 11 2003 - 01:14:57 EDT

  • Next message: Jack Haas: "Dembski's Challenge to Baylor biology faculty"

    Glenn Morton wrote:

    > Allen there is not one assumption in your logic above but 2. You assume that
    > your interpretation of Scripture is infallible. You assume that Genesis 1
    > actually teaches about the actualization of the earth, not the planning for
    > what the universe would be like.

    I believe that the creation of the universe is found only in "In the beginning
    God created the Heavens and the Earth." (Gen 1:1) The rest of Genesis 1,
    beginning with verse 2, deals primarily with the creation of the biosphere on
    planet earth. There may well have been a passage of a long period of time
    between the "In the Beginning" and verse 2, during which time the earth was in
    the condition as described in verse 2

         Gen 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.

    I believe that the formlessness, emptiness and darkness finds it's explanation
    in Job 38:9,

         JOB 38:4, 8, 9 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
         Tell me, if you understand. ... Who shut up the sea behind doors when
         it burst forth from the womb, when I made the clouds its garment and
         wrapped it in thick darkness,

    Putting these verses together and you have: "the earth was formless and empty
    as thick dark clouds wrap the surface of the deep, ....".

    The POV of Genesis 1 is from the surface of this water covered planet that is
    wrapped in formless, dark clouds. This POV is emphasized by the point that an
    evening and a morning can ONLY be known or experienced ON a rotating planet. If
    one were on such a planet you would not be able see, because of the thick, dark
    clouds, if there was anything else out there, i.e. stars, planets, sun.

    > If, as I argue, Genesis 1 represents the
    > pre-planning for the universe, then Genesis 1 should be interpreted not as
    >
    > And God said, 'let there be light and it was so'
    >
    > But as
    >
    > And God said, 'let there be light'. [a later editor said]: 'And it was so.'
    >
    > But the passage doesn't say (and this is very important) 'And it was so
    > IMMEDIATELY/Instantly'

    That is convenient, invent a redactor, for which there is zero evidence, and you
    can make the Bible say anything you want. And this comes from the guy who just
    said. "Anybody who wishes may write his or her amplified Genesis. I don't wish
    to."

    Genesis 1:2-2:3 can be understood in the knowledge of a previously existing
    universe (from verse 1:1) in this way:

    GE 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that
    the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called
    the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and
    there was morning

    If Gen 1:1 refers to the Creation of the universe, then, in verse 3, the light
    that is created is not associated with the creation of the universe. It is an
    event whereby someone on the surface of the globe, surrounded by black clouds
    will then experience light in the clouds. It is not guaranteed, perhaps not
    even expected, that the source of the light can be seen through the clouds.
    But, whatever the source, it lights up the clouds only on one side of the planet
    because "there was evening, and there was morning." Perhaps, the Sun,
    originally created along with the universe along with the planets, is lit up at
    this time. Now there is a source of light in the universe that is close enough
    to the planet to penetrate the formerly dark, thick clouds covering the globe.

    GE 1:6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate
    water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the
    expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky."

    It is possible to understand this to mean that the clouds and ocean were
    separated. The former atmosphere consisting of water drops supported, likely,
    in water vapor and perhaps other gasses, is then "made," or modified, to be an
    atmosphere with high visibility called "the sky." But clouds must still mask
    the sun and the universe because no mention of them is made at this time.

    GE 1:14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate
    the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and
    years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the
    earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights--the greater light to govern
    the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God
    set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the
    day and the night, and to separate light from darkness.

    In order for the lights to be seen from the planet "in" the sky, perhaps as one
    sees the sun "in" a window, the clouds would need to be dissipated. [This is
    whether or not you believe that the sun and moon were first created at this
    time, or if the dissipation of the clouds caused them to first be seen now.]
    And if you can see the sun and moon, you can then also see the stars. The
    making of the lights can be seen to be the making of them to appear in the sky.

    It is not necessary to interpret Genesis 1 to be such that the universe is
    created on "day four" of the creation week. Rather, Genesis 1 can be
    interpreted to allow for a previously created universe to come into view from
    the planet through a series of events during the Creation Week.

    Allen



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 11 2003 - 01:15:22 EDT