The literal 6 day creation in Genesis.
 

What do you think about the Genesis account of the wolds creation in 6 days.

Was it possible, did it happen or was the 6 days the Authors best way of describing the time period.

I know Genesis is Poetic in the way it was written and I personally suspect the latter as that fits in with a creation/evolution model.

In my opinion, it's entirely poetic. There's really no reason to insist that the "days" of Genesis are in any way literal, as the same word is used for various ages and periods of time.

I look at it this way. When what you THINK the Bible is saying seems to clearly contradict facts... re-examine your interpretation of the Bible. If I assume there is only ONE interpretation of scripture... and that I know it... I'm in for some aggravation.

maybe we made life hard for ourselves. At school I tried to use my naive literal stance on creation to got me out of studying evolution in science which didn't work. I only learned the 6 day creation thing was fact that by someone who told it to me.

We have lots of people in the US that believe in the 6-day creation. They fight to teach it in public schools. I think it's fine to believe what you want, but don't sabotage science for the rest of us.

Misconception
 

Another misconception having to do with Ego and human nature.

A good book to read is "The Way" from the Kabbalah Center. It will remind Christians of both Jesus teachings, and what we have learned from modern physics.
"Days", can be translated as, "ages".

What the, "Fall", is about has to do with ,"time/space" construct in which we find ourselves, in this material frequency, and world.
The greater reality involves the spirit, and the timeless, or, Eternity.

When you start applying your own "interpretation" you open up a slippery slope of degrading the entire Word. What do you mean by "literally"? When most people say "literal", they seem to assume that there is only one way to approach the text literally -- that "of course" is if you take certain phrases to be literal and others to be metaphors, and that all other combinations of literal and metaphor are then incorrect.


I could argue that the following approach to Genesis is literal:

1. God creates the world in six periods (not 24-hour days)
2. A large flood happened, which covered (from Noah's perspective) the entire world
3. God caused a confusion of languages when people were building the tower of Babel.

When most people say literal, I imagine they mean this:

1. God created the earth in six 24-hour days about 6000 years ago
2. God caused a truly worldwide flood, all animal species were saved on the ark, etc.
3. God created a bunch of languages at Babel

Anyhoot, in regards to describing the time period, according to science lets not forget that the earth was flat, so I suppose you could explore any possibilities of days and nights not equating to one earth rotation (model your interpretation based on a flat earth). However, the book of Job (regardless of being the most poetic), long before science had said the earth was round, stated that it was so.

I was with you until you put a divider between creation and evolution. Show me proof of the evolutionary process in the macro world, perhaps show how intelligence came into existence, or how complex life evolved from simplistic ancestors? From all that I have heard from one atheist troll after another, is one must have lots of imagination to accept evolution, and this comes by way by secular/atheist scientist. After all they will reject any notion of an intelligent designer because of the implications that that might have.

I believe that the earth was created in six days, and higher working created in the seventh (healing and Sabbath) while I hold a literal interpretation to Genesis, I don't believe that it tells the whole story. But the six days, is elsewhere in the Bible. And Jesus quotes Genesis as being an authoritative.

Evolution after all, is all about, "Time".
A "literal" 6 day creation, or, a creation involving evolution and 6 ages is a moot issue, since we are to understand today that time is illusory, (and involving space and gravity), and the greater reality is about the timeless, or, Eternity.

Thus also, the illustration of the Wachowski's movie is confirmed.

In reference to the ages, this is why genealogies cannot be used to tract the age of the earth.

Shortening genealogies by omitting names was commonplace. Matthew's genealogy of Jesus exhibits a pattern in which three sets of 14 generations are achieved (Mt 1:17). The number 14 was desirable because of the importance attributed to the symbolic meaning of seven ("complete, perfect"). Thus "Joram fathered Uzziah" (Mt 1:8 ) omits three generations (2 Ch 21:4-26:33) so as to accomplish the desired number (cp. Ezr. 7:1-5 with 1 Ch6).

From this example we discover another unexpected feature in biblical genealogies. Genetic terms, such as "son of" and "father," were flexible in meaning sometimes indicating a "descendant" and "grandfather or forefather." The word "daughter," for example, could mean a subordinate village affiliated with a nearby city and thus be translated "surrounding settlements" (Jdg 1:27, NIV).

Hi Lightworkerau,

I'm definitely in the "it's poetic" side of things. But, to me, it makes no difference as it has no impact whatsoever on the message of Christ. I think it's there to give a "Creation Story" to the Christianity constructed by that those who created the Bible.

But, as I said, it makes no difference to me as it has no affect on Jesus' message. So I'm more in the "meh" category.

Not too long ago, in the area of Turkey, remnants of a buried civilization was found, dated to twelve thousand years.
People have asked questions, such as who did Cain marry, and etc.

One explanation was that the genetics were so pure towards the beginning, that it was okay for people to marry their relatives. As in the fountainhead of a stream which is pure, and gets muddier as it travels downward.

However, the above link provided is plausable, given the understanding of revelations of physics, and the understanding of things involving a greater reality apart from time, (and space). Or, "Spirit".
If the, "Dragon", is about the carnal, physical, and involving the reptilian brain; and, the "Fall" about the present material world which changed, we can see how humanity has it's origins in the, "Angelic", and timeless, and scripture in Revelation about the dragon drawing a third of the "Stars" to the Earth with his tail, is about humanity.
In the same text after all, is depiction of the "Woman" (Israel), with the Sun, Moon, and "Stars" over her head.


In accordance with the illustration of "The Matrix", we can see how mankind has an eternal, and timeless aspect, or "angelic", and everything in the Bible also aligns with the Far Eastern perspective, and teachings.


If time was not a factor in the Garden of Eden, then, we count time in the Bible from the Fall, true?

I once heard it said that the hebrew word for create "bara" used in Genesis also could be taken as recreate. The Hebrew language has no word specifically for create out of nothing so the verb bara is translated to mean create in english.

Bara means fatten in hebrew in other contexts and that makes me wonder if the implication of fatten is to prepare the earth for life.


This could mean a transformation after the dinosaurs finished by God to make way for mammals and human life.

There is no reason to say the "fattening" of the existing earth didn't occur in the literal 6 days.

Why do you say that Genesis is poetic? Everything after the creation is a historical account of what actually happened. Why would the creation account be any different? Did you read this thread?

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18879

A literal interpretation is completelly compatible with the evolutionary process we can observe, the develpment of different forms of life from a common ancester by the process of natural selection. It is incompatible from many widely held theories about evolution but these theories are all about things which supposedly happened in the past and can't be tested scientifically.

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=380381&postcount=11

But look at the gymnastics you're going through on that thread to preserve a "literal" meaning. Earth means one thing in this verse and another in that verse. When God "makes" the greater light to rule the day, he's just making it visible. Lots of things are happening off-stage where we can't see, like an unmentioned Satanic corruption. Perspectives change from cosmic in one verse to human in another, etc. So sure, if you're willing to change the interpretation of words and the perspective on a verse-by-verse basis, and posit any and all sorts of off-stage activity before during and after... then you CAN say that Genesis 1 is "literal". But how useful is that? The ancients peoples of Mesopotamia believed that the sky was a "firmament" - a vast powerful clear dome that held back an ocean in the sky (which is why the sky was blue). It divided the waters above (in the sky) from the waters beneath (the seas). The Babylonians believed that it was created by the god Marduk from the carcass of the slain chaos goddess Tiamet. Genesis 1 fits pretty good with THAT perspective also. In fact it fits BETTER.

I think the question is, why do you feel so compelled to find some way to see the story literally? It's much more enjoyable to appreciate it as poetry.

Understanding that by "poetry" or "mythology" I don't mean "a pack of outrageous lies". I mean "a story that expresses things that are emotionally or spiritually true. A story that invokes spiritually true feelings in us."

AU:

However, AU, what do you think of the statements I made about "time" along with death and decay beginning at, "the Fall"?
Does it make sense? Can you answer as to how long Adam and Eve were in, "The Garden", and, why death and decay came into the whole world, through them?

So, in that case, post fall, we are speaking of a paradigm change, interdimensionally, and another timeline and history being realized.
True?
This may align with what science is telling us today, regarding the equations concerning multiple worlds, and dimensions theories.
You're not going to incorporate the latest findings in Physics, since Einstein?

However, AU, what do you think of the statements I made about "time" along with death and decay beginning at, "the Fall"?

From what I understand of Genesis, mortality entered the picture after the fall along with the knowledge of good and evil. Time may have not changed, just people and their lifespan and workload did.

Genesis doesn't give much away scientifically regarding the creation story.

It is my belief that we live in an eternal oscillating universe, that expands outward and contracts back to it's beginning in space-time, forever oscillating between the two states of Matter and energy.

Universe after universe is like an interminable succession of wheels forever coming into view, forever rolling onwards, disappearing and reappearing; forever passing from being to non being, and again from non being to being. In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, is perhaps after all the sum and substance of the philosophy of Buddhism. And this eternal wheel has so to speak, six spokes representing six forms of existence.” ---- Mon. Williams, Buddhism, pp. 229, 122.

The days and nights of Brahma are called Manvantara or the cycle of manifestation, ‘The Great Day,’ which is a period of universal activity, that is preceded, and also followed by ‘Pralaya,’ a dark period, which to our finite minds seems as an eternity. ‘Manvantara,’ is a creative day as seen in the six days of creation in Genesis, ‘Pralaya,’ is the evening that proceeds the next creative day. The six periods of Creation and the seventh day of rest in which we now exist are referred to in the book of Genesis as the generations of the universe.

The English word “Generation,” is translated from the Hebrew “toledoth” which is used in the Old Testament in every instance as ‘births,’ or ‘descendants,’ such as “These are the generations of Adam,” or “these are the generations of Abraham, and Genesis 2: 4; These are the generations of the Universe or the heavens and earth, etc. And the ‘Great Day’ in which the seven generations of the universe are eternally repeated, is the eternal cosmic period, or the eighth eternal day in which those who attain to perfection are allowed to enter, where they shall be surrounded by great light and they shall experience eternal peace, while those who do not attain to perfection are cast back into the refining fires of the seven physical cycles that perpetually revolve within the eighth eternal cosmic cycle.

A series of worlds following one upon the other,-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it. Every universe from the first to the last, from the smallest to the greatest, which have been created throughout the eons of eternity, still exist in their independent Space-Time positions within the eternal and boundless cosmos.

The New international Version, the Scofield Referrence Bible, and the Companion Bible, all note that the phase in Genesis 1: 2; The earth was formless and void (Having neither shape or mass) should be correctly translated, “The earth became without form and void.” The Hebrew word “Hayah” translated “was,” means “To become, occur, come to pass, Be.” (Vines Complete Expository of Old and New Testament Words, 1985. “To Be.”)

I am sure that one day our scientific community will prove that the wise religious men of old, had been correct in their belief.

http://www.world-science.net/otherne..._bouncefrm.htm

I would rather a theory which states that there are many galactic clusters out there within the boundless cosmos, each cluster consisting of billions of Galaxies falling inward toward a Great Abyss, Black Hole, Bottomless Pit, where, once torn to peices and reconverted into the electromagnetic energy from which they were created and accelerated along the dark worm hole to speeds far, far in excess of the speed of light, where that liquid like electromagnetic energy is spewed out in the trillions of degrees, somewhere far beyond the visible horizon of the boundless cosmos, where, from the cooling quantum of that electromagnetic energy a new universe is created, to which the light from its old position in space-time, would take billions upon billions of years to reach it.

I will stick my neck out here, and predict that one day far in the future, science will prove the existence of God.

Edited by SF Staff

What do you mean by mental gymnastics? I am simply using the same methods of interpretation that I would apply to any other writing. Many words have more that one meaning and you need to examine the context to find out which meaning is used in any specific case.

Isn't it obvious that the word "earth" has a different meaning in each of these statements?
Because it is obvious from its place in the Bible that it was intended to be literal. The rest of Genesis is a history of things that actually happened. There is no reason to believe that the first part is any different. It might be more enjoyabole to think of it as poetry but the Bible was given to teach us the truth.

A question Jesus addressed to Nicodemas applies here.

If you don't believe what God has told us about how he created the earth how can you believe what he tells us about heaven and what happens to us after we leave this life?

I'm afraid it's not obvious to me.


Actually, I have the same opinion about the rest of Genesis.


Spiritual truth perhaps. Not scientific and historical truth.

Genesis is critical to the Christian faith that the story of the fall of man in the garden of
Eden took place.

Jesus life, death and resurection centers around undoing the separation man man jas from God gained in the fall story.

The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
(Genesis 1:2 ESV)

The New international Version, the Scofield Referrence Bible, and the Companion Bible, all note that the phase in Genesis 1: 2; The earth was formless and void (Having neither shape or mass) should be correctly translated, “The earth became without form and void.” The Hebrew word “Hayah” translated “was,” means “To become, occur, come to pass, Be.” (Vines Complete Expository of Old and New Testament Words, 1985. “To Be.”)

And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.
(Genesis 1:9-10 ESV

The elements from the great nebula, which was the residue of one of the massive first generation stars of the first universal generation of light, when the greater percentage of its mass was condensed into the Black Hole around which the residue was trapped, began to be attracted to each other and finally condensed to create our solar system, in which, the contracting elements from which the planets were formed, would not become the great nuclear reactor that it is today, until the third day, or the third generation of the universe.

A couple comments.

If the point of Genesis is the fall of man, that's a SPIRITUAL point, not a scientific or historical one. It doesn't matter what year it took place, or how many days after creation, or just what mechanism God used to create life. It doesn't even matter if the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is an actual tree or a symbolic tree.

It's interesting that Jewish believers put much less emphasis on the fall of man occurring in the garden of Eden. Some rabbinical sources don't even believe in any such thing as "the fall of man". Frankly, there's no actual mention in Genesis of man suddenly acquiring a propensity for sin as a result of disobedience in the Garden. The consequences mentioned in Genesis seem entirely physical. Of course, once again, this might be entirely metaphorical for something spiritual. My point is that there are a lot of different ideas about what Genesis means, but almost none of it hinges on the literalism of the facts.

Same thing with Jesus mission. There are a lot of different interpretations, even among orthodox Christians, about just what Jesus accomplished and how. Throw Gnostics and other heterodox folks into the mix and the range is even broader.

It would not be until the third creative day, or the third generation of the universe, that the sun and moon would form in the expanse that devides the elements in Oort cloud, from the elements of which the earth was created.

The ability to sin was always there in man because of being something capable of exercising free will decisions.


There is one thing that bugs me in Genesis and that is that it says the serpent deceived Eve and physical changes occur to them both because of it.

I Find it interesting that people call the serpent Satan because it is not what it says.


Elsewhere in the bible it referrs o Satan deceiving Eve.

AU:
No, but it gives us indications that what modern Physics reveals is accurate.
Regarding a greater reality and Truth apart from "Space/Time".

"Reality is an illusion, albeit a very persistant one." -Einstein

Exactly! its good talking to you you have lots of good info about this stuff.

However, considering everything is connected, and, that science and religion are agreeing on the nature of the temporal and material world, and given the cosmic environmental situation approaching, involving the prophecies...perhap those questions are pertinent.

I think that's unfortunate. I think it indicates religion has accepted the naturalistic view that what really matters are historical and scientific data, not spiritual meaning. And I think it will get messy when scripture is interpreted to fit a particular scientific model that subsequently changes as better models arise.

It is also a historical point. Either it happened or it didn't. If it didn't happen then the spiritual implications are irrelevant.

That isn't surprising in light of the fact that they refused to believe that Jesus was the Messiah God had promised to send them. When anyone rejects any part of the truth his mind becomes blinded so that he is unable to understand any of the truth. If they have rejected God's remedy for sin it follows logically that they would refuse to believe the cause of sin.

We are good at doing that, tying to get our scientific theories to validate our religious ones as if science is all that matters.


One day science will look over the horizon and find God there.

AU:


? Wait. Are either of you saying here that everything is not ultimately connected..?

Or, that the prophecies are not applicable for today, including Christ's words in Mathew 24, wherein He includes the ecological/environmental situations we are seeing?
Because if you are, that is what is unfortunate.
The prophecis are sure, their predictions manifested in human affairs, such as the return of the Jews to Israel... the global community in which we now reside... as well as the cosmic and ecological environment in which we find ourselves, today.

Or, do you disagree?

I disagree. It's obvious that there is a sinful tendency in humanity. This would be true regardless of how accurate Genesis is.


I think that interpretation is less charitable than it might be. You most likely believe that Genesis is about the origin of sin because your spiritual tradition says so, and it says so because PAUL interprets it that way. Frankly, the passages all by themselves are pretty ambiguous about "sin". The word doesn't even occur in the garden story. The Gnostics read the same scripture and came away with a VERY different interpretation.

I disagree

With only a very few exceptions, I think that the primary audience for prophecy is always the group to which it is addressed. I don't think prophets go around prophesying about things that are going to happen thousands of years in the future.

Now many prophecies incorporate archetypal themes which recur again and again in history. It this way prophecy can have second and third applications. But it's primary application is always to the people who first heard it.

I don't believe, for example, that we are waiting around for prophecies in Revelations to be fulfilled. The book was addressing concerns in the time of it's writing.

So you don't believe that there is to be a first resurrection of the dead? Those who were the righteous ancestral spirits in the body of Jesus, whose graves were opened in the moment that Jesus gave up his spirit, and who, three days later, went into the city and showed themselves to many?

You don't believe that when those spirits, who now, in their spiritual existence live as God lives, gathering to themselves the required number of the spirits of the righteous, who are true to their indwelling ancestral spirit, whose righteous blood will be the ransom for the host body that each of the body of Christ, chooses in which to be reborn on this earth, as the risen multi-celled androgynous body of Christ, who will take the thrones that have been prepared for them and rule the Sabbath of one thousand years, after which, fire will descend from heaven and destroy all physical life forms that are left on this planet?

The word might not be there but the concept clearly is.

The nerve of you, Theophilus! The very gall...
?
S-Word, do you want to start citing your sources, regarding the information you are posting?

Now again, as example, the Kabbalah states that the word "days" used in Genesis refers to "ages", and why would the Eternal Almighty be limited to the planet's rotation, or orbit around the Sun?

Time, (and space), has no real signficance regarding Eternity, and again, modern physics confirms a greater and truer reality which exists.

Sorry, I missed responding to this one. Fortunately, the response is brief.

NO.

one notion is that it means six cosmic days...which number in the millions, billions of years etc...

i've heard it said before but don't remember where...here's one page that speaks of similar....whether it's correct in this instance i couldn't say

http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/v...s/genesis.html

Considering that we are still awaiting the first resurrection as recorded in the book of Revelation 20: 4-6, when they who will sit upon the thrones that have been prepared for them will be raised to life and rule with Christ (who is their heavenly compilation) for the Sabbath of one thousand years. The question that I must ask you here "Keith" is, who, on the day that Jesus was crucified and gave up the spirit, were they who came out of their Graves that were opened and who entered the city, Three Days later and showed themselves to many people?

Matthew 27: 52, And the graves were opened: and many bodies of the saints that slept arose. Verse 53, And came out of the graves and three days later after the resurrection, they went into the Holy city and appeared to many.

One would expect the risen body to appear to the family of Jesus first, and this is exactly what we see.

The first to see one of they, who were of body of the risen Christ, (the 365 day old unblemished Lamb of God, reborn on earth as Jesus who was offered up for our sake,) were his Mother, Mary the wife of Cleophas and her “Adelphe” Mary Magdalene, who, although looking straight at him, thought that he was the gardener, until he spoke her name.

The next to who one of the risen body of Christ appeared, were the two men who were walking to Emmaus, Cleophas who is also called Alpheas, who is the biological father of James the youngest of Mary's three biological sons, who Paul declares is the Brother of Jesus: and James the brother of Jesus, was the first to sit on the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision, and Cleophas (Who is also called Alpheaus) was the husband of Mary, who, with his son Simon, "the step brother to Jesus," who was to inherit the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision after his half brother, 'James the righteous,' was killed at the instigation of the same Sadducee sect that had his brother Jesus killed.

Although Cleophas and Simon on the road to Emmaus, walked and talked with one of the risen body of Christ for some kilometres, they did not recognise him for who he was, until Simon saw the manner in which he broke the bread.

Cleophas then returned to Jerusalem, where eleven of the disciples, which included Simon Peter and Simon the Patriot, who were cowering in a darkened room, the only one absent that evening when Jesus appeared in that dimly lit room in the form that they recognised as Jesus, was Thomas Jude another half brother of Jesus, who was called the Twin, although nowhere does the bible say that he was an actual twin or whether he just held a striking resemblance to someone else. But back to Cleophas, who said to the eleven, "He has risen, he appeared to Simon," who was of course Simon the step brother to Jesus who succeeded ‘James the younger’ as the head of the church founded by Jesus.

Then there were the seven disciples who were fishing on Lake Galilee having no success at all, when someone on the bank told them to throw their net on the right side of the boat in which they caught 153 fishes, sitting down to eat with that person, who had a fire prepared with fish on it and some bread, not one of the seven disciples of Jesus, who had walked and talked with him, dared to ask who he was, but they understood that he was of the risen body of Christ. Even when he ascended up into heaven as a cloud, some of the 11 disciples doubted that it was he. So I ask you again Keith, "Who were they?"

It would appear that you reject the idea that they were the dead in Christ, the one anoint by God, who were released with the death of the body of Jesus, the dead of who Peter says, "Now in their spiritual existence live as God lives etc.

So who were these dead saints who arose and appeared to many, but who's amazing resurrection and astonishing appearance was an event that no other writer in the New Testament managed to remember or write about except Matthew? Who are these amazing beings who seem inserted as a very odd parenthesis in the wrong place in the gospel that seemed to demand a parenthetical commentary ("AFTER Jesus resurrection")?

Answer: They were an imaginative and entirely imaginary addition by a very early editor of the gospel of Matthew.

P.S. The book of Revelation is not inspired scripture.

I submitted this in posts #78 and#79 in the thread, "CONTRADICTIONS IN THE BIBLE" which seem to be applicable here also.

Many scholars today believe that we live in an eternal oscillating universe, that expands outward and contracts back to it's beginning in space-time, a body that eternally oscillates between the two states of visible matter and invisible energy.

Universe after universe is like an interminable succession of wheels forever coming into view, forever rolling onwards, disappearing and reappearing; forever passing from being to non being, and again from non being to being. In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, is perhaps after all the sum and substance of the philosophy of Buddhism. And this eternal wheel has so to speak, six spokes representing six forms of existence.” ---- Mon. Williams, Buddhism, pp. 229, 122.

The days and nights of Brahma are called Manvantara or the cycle of manifestation, ‘The Great Day,’ which is a period of universal activity, that is preceded, and also followed by ‘Pralaya,’ a dark period, which to our finite minds seems as an eternity. ‘Manvantara,’ is a creative day as seen in the six days of creation in Genesis, ‘Pralaya,’ is the evening that proceeds the next creative day. The six periods of Creation and the seventh day of rest in which we now exist are referred to in the book of Genesis as the generations of the universe.

The English word “Generation,” is translated from the Hebrew “toledoth” which is used in the Old Testament in every instance as ‘births,’ or ‘descendants,’ such as “These are the generations of Adam,” or “these are the generations of Abraham, and Genesis 2: 4; These are the generations of the Universe or the heavens and earth, etc. And the ‘Great Day’ in which the seven generations of the universe are eternally repeated, is the eternal cosmic period, or the eighth eternal day in which those who attain to perfection are allowed to enter, where they shall be surrounded by great light and they shall experience eternal peace, while those who do not attain to perfection are cast back into the refining fires of the seven physical cycles that perpetually revolve within the eighth eternal cosmic cycle.

A series of worlds following one upon the other,-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it. Every universe from the first to the last, from the smallest to the greatest, which have been created throughout the eons of eternity, still exist in their independent Space-Time positions within the eternal and boundless cosmos.

The New international Version, the Scofield Referrence Bible, and the Companion Bible, all note that the phase in Genesis 1: 2; The earth was formless and void (Having neither shape or mass) should be correctly translated, “The earth became without form and void.” The Hebrew word “Hayah” translated “was,” means “To become, occur, come to pass, Be.” (Vines Complete Expository of Old and New Testament Words, 1985. “To Be.”)

I am sure that one day our scientific community will prove that the wise religious men of old, had been correct in their belief.

http://www.world-science.net/otherne..._bouncefrm.htm

Edited by SF Staff