The God of Creation

[Canuckster1127]

I'll answer as simply as possible. I cannot think of any other way than God saying, 'I, God, took x billions of years to Create" I find that to be quite meaningful.

How's that?

That's very revealing. How would God say that in Old Testament Hebrew? Please be specific.

Maybe you could tackle this as well if you wish; Who is the one who should decide how God should communicate for Himself? You, or God?

[hfd]

"That's very revealing. How would God say that in Old Testament Hebrew? Please be specific.

Maybe you could tackle this as well if you wish; Who is the one who should decide how God should communicate for Himself? You, or God?"

Not quite sure what your point is here other than to attempt to impress me with your knowledge of Hebrew. I confess a great deal of ignorance when it comes to Hebrew Mr *****. (edited for board violation)

Having said that, however, I would suggest that if God, in his infinite wisdom, had wanted to convey the idea that billions of years were involved in Creation he would have made it clear.

Christians seem to believe that he made it clear that Jesus is the saviour of mankind. Am I correct?

[zoegirl]

"That's very revealing. How would God say that in Old Testament Hebrew? Please be specific.

Maybe you could tackle this as well if you wish; Who is the one who should decide how God should communicate for Himself? You, or God?"

Not quite sure what your point is here other than to attempt to impress me with your knowledge of Hebrew. I confess a great deal of ignorance when it comes to Hebrew Mr ***** (edited for board violation).

Having said that, however, I would suggest that if God, in his infinite wisdom, had wanted to convey the idea that billions of years were involved in Creation he would have made it clear.

Christians seem to believe that he made it clear that Jesus is the saviour of mankind. Am I correct?

You confess a great deal of ignorance with Hebrew and then base your arguements on your ignorance and criticize those opposing arguements based on that ignorance. Good arguement

[hfd]

"That's very revealing. How would God say that in Old Testament Hebrew? Please be specific.

Maybe you could tackle this as well if you wish; Who is the one who should decide how God should communicate for Himself? You, or God?"

Not quite sure what your point is here other than to attempt to impress me with your knowledge of Hebrew. I confess a great deal of ignorance when it comes to Hebrew Mr Breen.

Having said that, however, I would suggest that if God, in his infinite wisdom, had wanted to convey the idea that billions of years were involved in Creation he would have made it clear.

Christians seem to believe that he made it clear that Jesus is the saviour of mankind. Am I correct?

You confess a great deal of ignorance with Hebrew and then base your arguements on your ignorance and criticize those opposing arguements based on that ignorance. Good arguement

No, I based ny position on the expertise of those who know full well the meaning of the word 'yom'. Have you ever relied on others to support your position? Not an uncommon activity.

[Byblos]

For example from the Literal Interpretation of Genesis, by Rich Deem:

God is still on the surface of the earth. "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." Where is the light? It's on the surface of the earth for the first time. Where does the light come from. The text does not say directly, but it gives a lot of clues. Did God create the light? No! If God had created the light, the text would have said so,

Doesn't the text of the Bible clearly say God created all things? If one were to claim God did not do what God says He did, would He not be calling God a liar? If the believer does not believe God's words, then how do they expect a sinner to change their ways and believe in them? One cannot say they believe in God yet deny the what he says is true.

Isaiah 45:7
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.

More examples can be cited, but one is enough to make the point.

I just wanted to comment on the above. I don't think you read the entire passage as Rich was most definitely not saying that God did not create light as you're implying above. What Rich is saying is that God had already created light (via creating the heavens and the earth, including our solar system). Then when He said 'let there be light' He simply lifted the clouds off of the earth and let the light (which he had already created) shine through.

I felt a clarification was in order. Please carry on.

Byblos.

[hfd]

“God is still on the surface of the earth. "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." Where is the light? It's on the surface of the earth for the first time. Where does the light come from. The text does not say directly, but it gives a lot of clues. Did God create the light? No! If God had created the light, the text would have said so…”

Is this a quote of Mr Deem? If so, then I'm really confused.

Byblos wrote:

“just wanted to comment on the above. I don't think you read the entire passage as Rich was most definitely not saying that God did not create light as you're implying above.”

I must say sir that the question 'Did God create the light?' and the following answer 'No!” certainly says to me that Mr Deem is saying God did not create the light. Perhaps I've missed something.

Then again, I wonder how the text would have explained that God created the light?

[Canuckster1127]

"Not quite sure what your point is here other than to attempt to impress me with your knowledge of Hebrew. I confess a great deal of ignorance when it comes to Hebrew Mr Breen.

Having said that, however, I would suggest that if God, in his infinite wisdom, had wanted to convey the idea that billions of years were involved in Creation he would have made it clear.

Christians seem to believe that he made it clear that Jesus is the saviour of mankind. Am I correct?

No. If you'd noticed in another thread I've clearly stated I am not an expert on Hebrew. The difference is that when you yourself are not an expert in something, it usually behooves one to avoid making absolute statements in the manner I've observed.

It's enough for me to know that there are many qualified and credible Hebrew Scholars who allow that the Genesis 1 & 2 uses of the word Yom can be consistently understood as either 24 hour days or periods of time. Based on the preponderance of all the evidence I've worked with I've come to the conclusion that the OEC position is most in accordance first with the Scriptural information and then with the scientific. I've also allowed the the YEC position is possible.

You've excluded the possibility of one over the other with no expertise of your own, while relying upon and presenting materials from sources with which you yourself have major disagreements.

That is indicative of a utlititarian approach which simply desires to argue, cast dount and tear down, while in its place neither building nor defending a credible alternative.

So we've established:

1. You have no basis to evaluate the credibility or reliability of the sources you cite.

2. You are willing to pull sources to make secondary points while you reject their primary ones with regard to the inspiration and inerrency of Scripture.

3. You present your positions as based upon "fact" and "logic" when asserting your unsupported or poorly supported opinions as unassailably true.

One would think that there might be a little room for some discussion and give and take for someone in that position if they were truly here in accordance with the Board Purpose and Discussion Guidelines here.

Not to be overlooked as well should probably be the dropping of my last name in the post above which is not disclosed elsewhere on this board. If I were the suspicious kind I might take that as a subtle dig or threat. Lucky I'm not.

And to top it all off, you end with a statement again asserting that God has not made something clear when you cannot offer what should have been done to make it clear other than a circular reference back to your original statement.

I think we've pretty much summed it up then.

If you have anything new to offer, please do, otherwise we can move on.

[Byblos]

“God is still on the surface of the earth. "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." Where is the light? It's on the surface of the earth for the first time. Where does the light come from. The text does not say directly, but it gives a lot of clues. Did God create the light? No! If God had created the light, the text would have said so…”

Is this a quote of Mr Deem? If so, then I'm really confused.

Byblos wrote:

“just wanted to comment on the above. I don't think you read the entire passage as Rich was most definitely not saying that God did not create light as you're implying above.”

I must say sir that the question 'Did God create the light?' and the following answer 'No!” certainly says to me that Mr Deem is saying God did not create the light. Perhaps I've missed something.

Then again, I wonder how the text would have explained that God created the light?

hfd,

Please try to use the '[ quote ]' and '[ / quote ]' without the blanks in between instead of the double quotes. It just makes it a little easier to read who wrote what.

Again, you're quoting out of context. The question 'Did God create light' followed by the answer 'No!' pertains to that particular instant in that particular sentence. It is not intended as a general statement as you're making it out to be. The answer is 'No' simply because God had already done it (created light as part of the creation of the heavens and the earth, including the sun). It's quite literal, really. I fail to understand why you can't see it. But even if you didn't, if you keep that perfectly sound explanation in mind when re-reading the article, you cannot possibly arrive at a different literal conclusion that the one offered by the author.

[Forum Monk]

Regarding 'yom', once again I would like to address an earlier challenge by canuckster to expalin what other words, Moses could have used to express a long period of time and expand the evidence that it did not mean a period of time.

http://biblicalstudies.qldwide.net.au/c ... _gen1.html

There are several Hebrew words which refer to a long period of time [4]. These include qedem which is the main one-word term for 'ancient' and is sometimes translated 'of old'; olam means 'everlasting' or 'eternity' and is translated 'perpetual', 'of old' or 'for ever'; dor means 'a revolution of time' or 'an age' and is sometimes translated 'generations'; tamid means 'continually' or 'for ever'; ad means 'unlimited time' or 'for ever'; orek when used with yom is translated 'length of days'; shanah means 'a year' or 'a revolution of time' (from the change of seasons); netsach means 'for ever'. Words for a shorter time span include eth (a general term for time); and moed, meaning 'seasons' or 'festivals'. Let us consider how some of these could have been used.

[Canuckster1127]

Regarding 'yom', once again I would like to address an earlier challenge by canuckster to expalin what other words, Moses could have used to express a long period of time and expand the evidence that it did not mean a period of time.

http://biblicalstudies.qldwide.net.au/c ... _gen1.html

There are several Hebrew words which refer to a long period of time [4]. These include qedem which is the main one-word term for 'ancient' and is sometimes translated 'of old'; olam means 'everlasting' or 'eternity' and is translated 'perpetual', 'of old' or 'for ever'; dor means 'a revolution of time' or 'an age' and is sometimes translated 'generations'; tamid means 'continually' or 'for ever'; ad means 'unlimited time' or 'for ever'; orek when used with yom is translated 'length of days'; shanah means 'a year' or 'a revolution of time' (from the change of seasons); netsach means 'for ever'. Words for a shorter time span include eth (a general term for time); and moed, meaning 'seasons' or 'festivals'. Let us consider how some of these could have been used.

Correction. I think it does mean a period of time. The issue is in contrast to setting it off from a 24 hour day.

Can you give one example in the Old Testament where qedem or olam was used in the manner you propose?

There clearly are instances where yom is used to mean more than a 24 hour day so this is not introducing a new usage or concept.

If you cannot demonstrate similar instances for these words here wouldn't that indicate that the usage of yom is more established in this context than the alternates proposed here?

[Forum Monk]

Can you give one example in the Old Testament where qedem or olam was used in the manner you propose?

There clearly are instances where yom is used to mean more than a 24 hour day so this is not introducing a new usage or concept.

If you cannot demonstrate similar instances for these words here wouldn't that indicate that the usage of yom is more established in this context than the alternates proposed here?

from the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament By G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, Heinz-Josef Fabry

The noun Qedem occurs 61 times in the OT including:
11 in psalms
9 in genesis (twice in 12:8 .)
6 in Isa 1 - 39
5 in Judges
4 in Isa 40 - 55
3 each in Eze, Job, Lam
2 each in Num, Deu, Jer, Mic, Prv
1 each in Jsh, 1Ki, 2Ki, Zec, Jon, Hab, Neh

It has spatial meaning in Ps 139:5, Isa 9:11(12 in eng)
Temporal meaning in Neh 12:46, Job 29:2, Ps 74:12, 77:6,12, 143:5, Prv 8:22, Isa 45:21, 46:10, Jer 30:20, Lam 5:21

I leave to you to investigate the word 'olam'. These words are in your Bible. There are not random hebrew words.

[Canuckster1127]

Can you give one example in the Old Testament where qedem or olam was used in the manner you propose?

There clearly are instances where yom is used to mean more than a 24 hour day so this is not introducing a new usage or concept.

If you cannot demonstrate similar instances for these words here wouldn't that indicate that the usage of yom is more established in this context than the alternates proposed here?

from the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament By G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, Heinz-Josef Fabry

The noun Qedem occurs 61 times in the OT including:
11 in psalms
9 in genesis (twice in 12:8 .)
6 in Isa 1 - 39
5 in Judges
4 in Isa 40 - 55
3 each in Eze, Job, Lam
2 each in Num, Deu, Jer, Mic, Prv
1 each in Jsh, 1Ki, 2Ki, Zec, Jon, Hab, Neh

It has spatial meaning in Ps 139:5, Isa 9:11(12 in eng)
Temporal meaning in Neh 12:46, Job 29:2, Ps 74:12, 77:6,12, 143:5, Prv 8:22, Isa 45:21, 46:10, Jer 30:20, Lam 5:21

I leave to you to investigate the word 'olam'. These words are in your Bible. There are not random hebrew words.

I'm quite aware that the words occur in the Bible.

I asked for instances where they were used in the manner you propose, not simply where they were used in the Bible.

You suggest if God/Moses wanted to convey the idea of a long period of time they would have used these words other than yom, which also clearly can convey that meaning.

How about if you suggest one use for each word with a text and we can look to see if those words are ever used in that context.

[Forum Monk]

The point of the exercise was to show that other words exist in hebrew which define periods of time. Yom (or yown or ywm) is not the only one. I have seen several mentions that somehow the hebrew language is incapable of expressing ideas, especially when translated into "english". I completely reject such claim.

I don't know if any on this board are truly hebrew scholars (I am not) but there are enough resources about that it may be worthwhile to start a thread to discuss hebrew translations of words. I think there is plenty of poorly done translating that needs to be brought to light and clarified.

[Canuckster1127]

The point of the exercise was to show that other words exist in hebrew which define periods of time. Yom (or yown or ywm) is not the only one. I have seen several mentions that somehow the hebrew language is incapable of expressing ideas, especially when translated into "english". I completely reject such claim.

I don't know if any on this board are truly hebrew scholars (I am not) but there are enough resources about that it may be worthwhile to start a thread to discuss hebrew translations of words. I think there is plenty of poorly done translating that needs to be brought to light and clarified.

The onus is on you then to present an example of the word used in the manner you propose. The sources I have examined indicate that yom is the proper word if in fact the intent of God and Moses was more than a 24 hour time period.

It seems reasonable if other words are suggested as possible that there should be some evidence that they are used for that concept.

Simply raising the possibility without an example of their proper usage doesn't really make a point and in fact represents an attempt to second guess the meaning rather than simply perform exegesis on what God actually did say.

I think it makes a point however that the words offered as potentially better than yom to my knowledge never are actually used in that manner anywhere else in the Old Testament.

[Forum Monk]

The onus is on you then to present an example of the word used in the manner you propose. The sources I have examined indicate that yom is the proper word if in fact the intent of God and Moses was more than a 24 hour time period.

(Addressed to Canuckster) Here is your original post:

Assume for the sake of argument that Moses and God intended to mean periods of time rather than 24 hour days.

Assume for the sake of argument that the formula day and evening phrasing found there has to include some meaning in days 1 - 3 different from our days and evenings in view of the lack of a sun.

What word or words would be used here instead of Yom or what difference in it's use would there be to communicate the concept of longer period of time?

(Addressed to Canucketer) You are asking me to prove your assumptions as clearly Moses never intended to express periods of times greater than one day in the Genesis 1 & 2. So in response to the question 'which words could he have used', I gave a link and I can supply others as well. But there is no "onus" on me to prove your hypothetical. I don't believe Moses was speaking of long periods of time. The evening and morning terminology as well as the ordinal numbering leave no doubt. In fact there is no such double qualifying of the word yowm (yom, ywm, mwy) anywhere else in the Bible.