Genesis 1
Day 1 Day and night were created
Day 2 The sky was seperated from the water
Day 3 Land and sea was seperated, and vegetation appeared on the land
Day 5-a The sun amd moon were created.
Day 6 Animals, birds and fish and humans were created (presumably in
that order)
Genesis 2
doesn't give a timeline but it would appear at this point God had done
the first 6 days. (verse 1)
verse 5 then tells us there were no shrubs or plants, depite vegetation being created on day 3, he then formed one man, who [he] then placed in
the Garden of Eden and created trees. This contradicts days 3 and 6
In verse 18 God decided Adam needed a helper, so created animals etc. No suitable helper was found so [he] created Eve.-a This contradicts the
order of day 6.
So you either have two similar creation stories or if it's one story
then it's flawed.
Also a point about Genesis 1, God seperated the light from darkness and called it day and night, yet didn't create the sun until day 5.
My second point, which we may hae discussed previously, we know as a
fact that befor homo sapien we had erectus and habilis. both well prior
to sapiens, how does that work?
On 15/08/2026 13:43, John wrote:
Genesis 1
Day 1 Day and night were created
Day 2 The sky was seperated from the water
Day 3 Land and sea was seperated, and vegetation appeared on the land
Day 5-a The sun amd moon were created.
Day 6 Animals, birds and fish and humans were created (presumably in
that order)
Genesis 2
doesn't give a timeline but it would appear at this point God had done
the first 6 days. (verse 1)
verse 5 then tells us there were no shrubs or plants, depite
vegetation being created on day 3, he then formed one man, who [he]
then placed in the Garden of Eden and created trees. This contradicts
days 3 and 6
In verse 18 God decided Adam needed a helper, so created animals etc.
No suitable helper was found so [he] created Eve.-a This contradicts
the order of day 6.
So you either have two similar creation stories or if it's one story
then it's flawed.
Also a point about Genesis 1, God seperated the light from darkness
and called it day and night, yet didn't create the sun until day 5.
My second point, which we may hae discussed previously, we know as a
fact that befor homo sapien we had erectus and habilis. both well
prior to sapiens, how does that work?
John, it is generally accepted by most that the Genesis account does
indeed contain two different Creation narratives. I believe the accounts
are meant to be 'poetic' in style, rather than literal. There are all
sorts of clues in the text that point to the notion that there were
other people around. Even 'cities' are mentioned, and then there's the question of whom these early people married.
My own view is that Adam and Eve (and the Bible does give genealogies)
may have been at the beginning of humanity becoming "In God's Image",
rather than just another species of animal. IOW it was a spiritual awakening, a sort-of spiritual coming-of-age for our species.
Taking these things too literally doesn't really work.
Genesis 2
doesn't give a timeline but it would appear at this point God had done
the first 6 days. (verse 1)
In verse 18 God decided Adam needed a helper, so created animals etc. No suitable helper was found so [he] created Eve.-a This contradicts the
order of day 6.
Also a point about Genesis 1, God seperated the light from darkness and called it day and night, yet didn't create the sun until day 5.
My second point, which we may hae discussed previously, we know as aDo you ever read New Scientist these days?
fact that befor homo sapien we had erectus and habilis. both well prior
to sapiens, how does that work?
Taking these things too literally doesn't really work.Taking them literally is not a problem. Refusing to integrate all the information is a problem.
It dooes if you ignore the inconsistences :-)Or rather, if you manufacture inconsistencies.
On 15/08/2026 13:43, John wrote:
Genesis 2
doesn't give a timeline but it would appear at this point God had done
the first 6 days. (verse 1)
I presume you are under the impression that Moses invented the chapter divisions.
In verse 18 God decided Adam needed a helper, so created animals etc.
No suitable helper was found so [he] created Eve.-a This contradicts
the order of day 6.
Not at all, so long as you realise that Hebrew lacks the grammatical distinction so that v.19 would read, "And out of the ground God *had*
formed every beast of the field".
Also a point about Genesis 1, God seperated the light from darkness
and called it day and night, yet didn't create the sun until day 5.
Is the sun the only source of light?
My second point, which we may hae discussed previously, we know as a
fact that befor homo sapien we had erectus and habilis. both well
prior to sapiens, how does that work?
Do you ever read New Scientist these days?
I presume you are under the impression that Moses invented the chapter
divisions.
Not at all, and other than an aid to us, I don't see how that comes into
the equation.
Not at all, so long as you realise that Hebrew lacks the grammatical
distinction so that v.19 would read, "And out of the ground God *had*
formed every beast of the field".
It could be interpreted that this was done previously, but doesn't quite
fit imo, as according to Genesis 1, Adam and the other species were all created in the same day.
what else provides sufficient light to label it day?
I've never read it, does it answer the question and if so how?That figures. So you are still quoting the evolution you learned in high school half a century ago. As an intelligent creationist, I like to keep
On 16/08/2026 19:30, John wrote:
I presume you are under the impression that Moses invented the
chapter divisions.
Not at all, and other than an aid to us, I don't see how that comes
into the equation.
So chapters 1 and 2 form a complete narrative, with no break. First you
get the outline of the six days, then detail of what happened on the
sixth day is added.
what else provides sufficient light to label it day?
God's glory? A special light for a special purpose?
I've never read it, does it answer the question and if so how?That figures. So you are still quoting the evolution you learned in high school half a century ago. As an intelligent creationist, I like to keep
up to date with my science and am constantly impressed at how Darwin is being systematically demolished as new discoveries pile up.
It may surprise you, but Darwin's original idea of change being
inherited has been disproven by the discovery of genes. Have you come
across "genes" before?
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 02:48:18 |
| Calls: | 1,102 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,965 |