Evidence for God from Science

For starters, what do you make of these verses:

Genesis 2:5: And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Wouldn't plants need water to survive? Or am I reading this wrong and Genesis 2 actually says there were no plants before God made rain.

Another theory. Could it be possible that God did not create man on Earth, but rather sent him here at a later date? There is a geographical location of Eden given in the Bible, which I'm guessing was never found.

Genesis 3
23: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24: So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

From these verses, I gather two things:

1: Eden should still be around, guarded by angels wielding something that looks like a flaming sword. If God planned to destroy it, then it would be safe to assume God would not have bothered to waste an angel's time by putting him on guard duty when he could be smiting demons at his own discretion. However, we know the likelyness that Eden is on Earth is extremely low. A collapse into the underground isn't out of the question, but seems rather unlikely, since again, if God planned on hiding it so greatly, He would not have placed a guardian, and if He wanted it found, then we certainly have the ability to find it today. In addition, Eden could not have been in Heaven, since Adam was made in a physical body, and Heaven is not within this universe.

2: Man was cast out of Eden, to till the earth from which he was taken. Earth here I assume is not talking about the planet earth, but rather the earth under our feet, dirt in other words. This means that an off-world origin is not out of the question. Now, as explained above, Eden does not appear to be on Earth. What I would suggest is that perhaps some sort of portal is somehwere near the geographical location given in Genesis, and it was this portal that the writer of Genesis saw in whatever vision God gave him.

Another question I have is regarding the creation of more humans. A few more interesting verses:

Genesis 4

"14: Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15: And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
16: And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
17: And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch."

This would imply that the world had quite a bit of people within it, if Cain did not think he could escape others killing him anywhere in the world, if he did not know his wife, which for all practical purposes would have been his sister as well, and if the firstborn of the first man and woman actually had enough people to build a city. Is it perhaps possible that after making Adam and Eve that God may have made more humans which are not mentioned in Genesis? It would certainly explain the sudden rise in population density, as well as the existance of other races.

Again, these are just theories of some possible alternatives to our origins. Any criticism and comments are welcome.

Just two:

1) It has been postulated that before God set in motion the water cycle as we know it now, a mist rose up from the surface of the earth to water the plants. Genesis 2:6 Some YEC scientists have also claimed to prove that there was a layer of water under the crust. (Sorry, I can't seem to find any sources for this right now, but it was around 1905).

2) Adam lived to 930 years and its possible that Cain just met other offspring from another generation. In about 25 generations, the number and variety in the family tree would have been immense?

I've also thought along similar lines about Eden.

RGeeB wrote:Just two:

1) It has been postulated that before God set in motion the water cycle as we know it now, a mist rose up from the surface of the earth to water the plants. Genesis 2:6 Some YEC scientists have also claimed to prove that there was a layer of water under the crust. (Sorry, I can't seem to find any sources for this right now, but it was around 1905).

2) Adam lived to 930 years and its possible that Cain just met other offspring from another generation. In about 25 generations, the number and variety in the family tree would have been immense?

I've also thought along similar lines about Eden.

Does it state Cain's lifespan though? If he had a normal human's lifespan, then the situation again becomes unlikely.

i think all humans lived extended lifespans (into the hundreds). it was after the flood that lifespans began shortening.

what vision in genesis suggests a portal? can you post more info?

No, what I meant was that the person who wrote Genesis might have envisioned a portal and assumed Eden was on Earth.

One more thing, It's kind of far fetched, but God does place a guardian at the ENTRANCE to Eden. The Bible doesn't mention it having a fence or anything of the sort(I think), so that might imply the entrance may be across space rather than a normal gate.

cool idea.

don't get mad, though. i still don't understand the portal part. where, how, and why would a portal have been imagined? what i mean is, what were you reading when you got this idea?

I was referring to the author of Genesis. Did God tell him directly what to write, or did he see these things in a vision? If he saw a portal in a vision, the author might not have known. And of course, there is always the chance that his visions simply showed him Eden, but he did not know eden was on another planet. Of course, this is just speculation...

oh, i see. hmmm, i do wonder why they haven't been able to find it yet. they haven't found the ark yet either, huh?

wouldnt the ark have rotten away by now?

They found a part of the ark just where the bible says it would be on Mount Ararat.

Actually, Scripture doesn't say "Mount Ararat," but rather "mountains of Ararat" (Genesis 8:4). A more correct interpretation of "mountains" would perhaps also be "hill range" or "hill country."

I'd also question as Mastermind does, whether there would be any remains to the ark. It makes sense that Noah and company would have use the wood as resources (the world around them had just been flooded afterall). So any remains, in addition to rotting away, would have very likely been used for other things.

Kurieuo.

Mastermind wrote:For starters, what do you make of these verses:

Genesis 2:5: And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Here's my take.

<blockquote>Genesis 2:5-7 (NASB)—
5 Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground.
6 But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground.
7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. </blockquote>Firstly, the vegetation being spoken of here is "of the field." That is, vegetation humanity would look after and eat from as a food source. So Genesis is telling us there was none, as there is not yet a need for it until man was to come onto the stage.

To surface another point, erets (translated "earth"), according to the Strongs can also mean country, nations, land and so forth. I believe "land" is the best word to use in this passage. So I believe there were no "plants of the field" for God had not sent rain (or watered) the "land." What land? The land that becomes watered in verse 6, and from which God forms man. And as verses 8 and 10 talk of Eden, I think it is very safe to conclude the land of Eden is being spoken of here in Genesis 2:5-6 whenever "earth" is referred to. Why does God water the land in verse 6? Well assumably as a habitat for Adam. Now this means it could very well be possible that God had caused rain throughout the rest of Earth and before the land of Eden, and that plant life was already flourishing outside of Eden.

Additionally, while "rain" in verse 5 is perhaps best translated "rain" in many passages, I've read in reference to Gleason Archer's Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, it could also refer to any kind of water precipitation. Just something that is perhaps worthy noting in passing.

Anyway, I just thought I'd share these insights.

Kurieuo.

your right its called mountains of Ararat, but anyway archealogists believe they have found Noah's Ark high in the Ararat mountains. Evidence points towards it anyway.