1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured genesis 1:1 and creation ex nihilo

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Calminian, Jul 9, 2018.

  1. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,505
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This discussion reminded me of a book I haven’t looked at in quite a while.
    It’s by Paul Copan and William Lane Craig
    Creation out of Nothing, A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration (Baker, 2004, 280 pages)
    A very through review of the subject from a wide variety of perspectives.
    Includes critical analysis of Hebrew and Greek grammar relating to the topic.
    It may interest you.

    Rob
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    <Sigh> He is saying, as I am, that there is no logical connection (verse two is not subordinate to verse one) nor is there a chronological connection (no gap).

    The earth was created. The earth was unformed and unfilled. Its being unformed and unfilled is not the result of some action subsequent to verse 1.

    No, they don't. Your inability to understand rather simple concepts is the problem.

    That is because there is no gap, in spite of your continued falsehood.
     
  3. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I may, especially now as I've been focusing on this study. I know they don't hold to young earth as I do, but would be good to check out. Thank you.
     
    #23 Calminian, Jul 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
  4. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I'm sorry, you've said what you've said, and I simply responded to what you said. I focused on a statement. If you really agree with Barrick, you misspoke. All I can do is go by your words.

    But if you're saying you agree with him, I'll take you at your word.
     
    #24 Calminian, Jul 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
  5. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What does "without form" mean? Do you imagine a planet in space, the surface of which is all ocean? And wouldn't that suggest form?
     
  6. agedman

    agedman Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    11,023
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Does it matter?

    I am not making light of the topic, but considering the scope of pose and poetry in the Scriptures, is it not better to state with certainty as the Scriptures do:
    15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.​

    Does Genesis 1 give all the details and facts of creation? Of course not!

    God left such an abundance undiscovered for humankind to argue over, yet the certainty is that God creates. He did so (Imo) for two reasons: 1) To allow for humans to become so self absorbed as to confirm their foolish minds in darkness, and 2) To allow for believers to be all the more encouraged and certain of the authority and knowledge of the Creator.

    He is not haphazard, desperate, nor unskilled, but takes time, takes patience, and demonstrates such intricacy that humankind even in this modern age have yet to reach the full depth of any science, but merely tread on the surface disclosing what we might scratch up.

    He did not stop creating but according to Scriptures continues:
    1“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2“In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3“If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.​

    What I haven't found in Scriptures is if God ever stops creating.

    My own opinion (which is worthless) is that He does not, but as the glory of the new heavens and earth radiate His glory, the book closes, and some of us long to know more.
     
  7. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have:

    Gen 2:1-2 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
     
  8. stgeorge

    stgeorge New Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    .....In gen 1:1....earth and the heavens would be better translated as " matter and space".....this distinguishes v.1 from the creation of the planet earth later in Gen. Secondly, Adam's posterity could only use the existing words in Hebrew to describe the universe in the vernacular. Thirdly, then the "formless earth" is not the literal earth.....it is what we know today as "matter, the sum total of all the molecules in the universe that existed but yet....without being organized into patterns and designs.

    I might add that when God created light, there is the implication that light moved at infinite speed. This would fill the universe with light from one end to the other. But when God separated light from darkness, He then slowed down the speed of light creating tiny lights in the night sky. The point is we have figurative descriptions or best available understandings of events on these six literal days.

    Lastly, we can agree that "bara" in Hebrew means to create from nothing like you say. God spoke all matter and space into existence with His Almighty power. But God created the universe at the speed of thought.

    Food for thought.
     
  9. atpollard

    atpollard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2018
    Messages:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    1,158
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Genesis 1 is also a polemic refuting the creation myths of the surrounding people and empires. All of the details, from a single pre-existing God, to ex nihilo creation, to the reference to water serves to directly refute some critical aspect of all other mythologies. Genesis 1 is God saying to the rest of the ‘gods’ ... “Liar, liar. Pants on fire!”

    It is not primarily a ‘scientific’ text. It is first and foremost a theological text conveying important truths about God.
     
  10. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,505
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The words used are simple ones, land/earth (eretz) and sky/skies (shamaim). Many commentators have expressed that the phrase is a figure of speech, a merism. A merism uses two opposites to form an expression, heaven and earth = everything that is, the universe - although recognize we only began to know how large the universe is in the last 150 years.
    God’s authority was vested in the words communicated through the author. It would be irresponsible to add modern scientific meanings to the authorized original communication. It can’t mean to me what it didn’t mean to the original audience.

    Rob
     
    #30 Deacon, Jul 11, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Exactly! I posted this the last time there was a long thread on this subject (a couple years ago). (See: https://www.baptistboard.com/thread...n-concerning-genesis-1-1.105801/#post-2339715 )

    A merism names the two extremes, in this case "the heavens" (the highest extreme - an unimaginable distance) and "the earth" (the closest extreme - right under our feet) and is used as a type of synecdoche where a part of something is used to indicate the whole ("my wheels," referring to my car).

    With a merism the extremes are used to indicate the highest and lowest, and everything in between!

    In the beginning God created the highest high and the lowest low, and everything in between. :)
     
  12. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I don't know about translated, but I definitely understand it as matter—the matter that was eventually used to form the earth and sea. I think thats the clear straightforward message of the first three verses. But I think you have to translate 'eretz as earth. And I think heaven is, in its basic meaning, space. "God called the expanse, heaven."

    It brings up some interesting things to think about. This space was expanded on day 2, which would imply it was unexpanded on day 1. Perhaps the first verse is conveying that, in the beginning, God created the unformed earth (matter) and the unexpanded heavens (space-a much smaller space than we see today).

    I think there is merit to this, particularly in light of day 2 when God divided this matter, and made the earth and sea from only 1 portion of it. Humphreys' model leans toward this.

    I think they used the best available words, which seems adequate.

    Thanks, I'll chew on that for a bit.
     
    #32 Calminian, Jul 11, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  13. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I think merism is a reasonable inference. The problem is, Sailhamer goes on to speculate that verse 1 speaks of the entire creation of everything, prior to the 6 days of creation. He doesn't see it as a title, referring to the coming 6 days, but rather a narrative of its own describing an undisclosed period of time in which the heavens and the earth and everything in them were finished. He bases this, also, on the idea that re'shiyth (beginning) can refer to a beginning period, not merely a beginning point (which I think also has merit). He then speculates that the 6 days that follow (possibly happening billions of years later) are the creation of the land of Eden, which is really the land of Israel. That's where he jumps off the deep end and gets himself into a world of trouble.
     
    #33 Calminian, Jul 11, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  14. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I think it's a good point, and no, I don't think Genesis 1 is ever speaking of a planet, per se, in the sense of a land/sea unit. In fact, all throughout Scripture, earth and sea are distinct.

    Ex. 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them....​

    Earth and sea are always distinct, everywhere in the entire Bible. The writers of both the Old and New Testaments were referring to land when they used the word earth (God called the dry land earth). They divided creation into 3 basic points of reference, land, sea sky.

    So, I do think you're right, I don't know that Genesis 1:1-3 is speaking of a planet covered with water. I don't think that existed yet. I think it was merely talking about watery matter that might have been spherical, due to gravity, but was not solid in any sense, and thus formless.
     
  15. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But plainly, THE WATERS were already in existence.
     
  16. atpollard

    atpollard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2018
    Messages:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    1,158
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Mesopotamian (Babylonian-Akkadian)

    Tiamat was a Babylonian sea-dragon, presumably originating from the Sumerian monster Labbu begot and killed by Enlil. The Enuma Elish describes the events in the universe prior to the creation of a new world order by Marduk. Initially there were the mingled waters of Abzu, the abyss of sweet water, Tiamat, the salt-water ocean, and Mammu, the mists hovering over their surfaces. Abzu and Tiamat were the parents of the first gods, Lahmu and Lahamu; their children were Ansar and Kisar, and grandchildren Enu and Ea. All the commotion made by the young deities greatly annoyed Abzu and Tiamat, who upon the advice of Mammu, decided to destroy them. When Ea learned of their plot, he used his magical powers to thwart it, and perhaps even killed Abzu. The final deliverance, however, was achieved through the son of Ea, Marduk.

    According to legend before this deliverance occurred a cosmic war evolved. Timat was sadden by Abzu’s death, and greatly angered. The news reached the other gods that she was making fearsome war preparations which at first dismayed them. Along with her second husband Kingu, and an army of dragon and serpent forms, Tiamat, mother of the gods, aimed at universal destruction. Chaos gripped the world. In an attempt to counteract Tiamat’s terrible threat, Anser proposed that Marduk be appointed divine champion and armed with ‘matchless weapons’ for the terrible battle. This was agreed upon as well as Marduk’s insistence that he be acknowledged first among the gods. With bow and trident, club and net, and an amoury of winds he rode his chariot into the fray. When Tiamat opened her jaws to swallow him Marduk launched a mighty wind right into her mouth, so she could not close it, shot an arrow into her stomach and slew her. He took her followers captive, and fastened upon his own breast the tablets of destiny-the wedding gift of Tiamat to Kingu. Then he sliced her carcass in two halves; out of one he made heaven, from the other he formed earth. On the earth, he formed humankind from the blood of Kingu before returning to his temple in Babylon.


    In another version of this legend Tiamat is depicted as a primordial, creation sea-goddess being the power of the ocean waters who begets eleven monsters. She becomes enraged by the death of her first husband now called Apsu, the underground sweet water, is killed by Enki who cooperated with the gods under the leadership of Marduk. In this version Tiamat is reported to have created an exact replica of Apsu, the Esarra. The cosmic battle also is waged and Marduk defeats Tiamat. He then splits her in two, one half becomes the vault of heaven; her eyes become the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates with mountains rising over her head.

    Cotterell, Arthur, A Dictionary of World Mythology, New York, G. P. Putman’s Sons, 1980. pp. 51-52
    Jordan, Michael, Encyclopedia of Gods, New York, Facts On File, Inc. 1993, pp. 260-261

    Most critics of the Bible focus on the similarities and accuse the Bible of plagarism. However, if one focuses on the differences, one can see that the One True God is utterly refuting the details of the creation mythos (and therefore of the false gods themselves) of the great Mesopotamian Empires.

    Others thought that the primordial WATER was a god who gave birth to the other gods and from which the universe was created by these false gods. The TRUE GOD claims to have already existed before the WATER, that the WATER was nothing and that GOD created everything.

    Imagine what Genesis 1 would mean to someone living in Mesopotamia!
     
  17. loDebar

    loDebar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,913
    Likes Received:
    94
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Relying on more accurate translations, it become evident that the initial creation of the earth an heavens (space) is not mentioned.

    Gen 1:1
    In the beginning of God's preparing the heavens and the earth --
    Gen 1:2
    the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness is on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,
    Gen 1:3
    and God saith, 'Let light be;' and light is.

    The first creation mentioned here is light.

    We know Satan and others were expelled are reserved into darkness,. There was no darkness in Heaven. A place of darkness had to be created, It is not in Heaven, but here.

    From Job 38:7 God speaking to Job ,we know beings were here when light was created by the response mentioned.

    So, the creation of the Universe , is not mentioned but we know it had to exist.

    What is the creation story the beginning of? The redemption of sinful beings. A place for man, Jesus to be man and one of us.

    Heb 2:14
    Seeing, then, the children have partaken of flesh and blood, he himself also in like manner did take part of the same, that through death he might destroy him having the power of death -- that is, the devil --
     
  18. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    If you read the first verse of Genesis as a title, yes. The question is, is it merely a title or is it part of the day 1 narrative? One suggestion is to read the first 5 verses of the Bible without verse breaks. Sarfati made the point that if there were no added verses, gap theories likely would not have developed.
     
  19. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    When you ask the wrong question you get a wrong answer.

    The question is not between verse 1 being merely a title and verse 1 being part of the day 1 narrative.

    The question is, does verse 1 act as an expression of intent and is a synopsis of what follows or is it part of the day 1 narrative?

    The inclusion of both the vaw disjunctive and the circumstantial clause between verse 1 and the beginning of the day 1 narrative in verse 3 makes that pretty obvious.
     
  20. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    It's a question many ask. Scholars ask. Sarfati in his commentary asks. And your answer to it has caused many to conclude the waters were preexisting. You may not like that, but it's a fact.
     
Loading...