Could this be a possible interpretation of the first creation story?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wingz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wingz

Guest
1- The gap theory
While looking up interpretations of the genesis account I found something known as the gap theory. The article I read claimed that Genesis begins with God restoring the world after the fall of Satan. This has to do with the originally Hebrew version of the text saying that the Earth became dark and void not that it already was. I wondered if there was a time when something fell from the sky onto the Earth and caused mass destruction and I immediately thought of the extinction of the dinosaurs. I continued searching and found remarkable similarities between the scientific account of the dinosaurs extinction and Genesis

https://docs.google.com/document/d/.../edit?usp=drivesdk&ouid=104524621861211522425
What do you think? Is there evidence I overlooked?
 
Last edited:
I think this is a bit much to suppose. Where does the idea that the earth was form and without void was actually that the earth became form and without void come from?
 
“Now the Earth was formless and void” -Genesis 1:2.
This is the common translation of this verse however the original Hebrew word that is translated as was is “hayah” which means to become. This means that the Earth became formless and void which implies that the Earth originally had form. The correct translation of this word as was or become in terms of genesis 1:2 has been debated for 2,000 years.
 
Last edited:
The creation story is entirely theology not history. How would the writer of Genesis know anything about the beginning of the world or dinosaurs? Scholars believe it was actually put in writing about the time of the return from exile. this was a time to emphasis the order and goodness of God’s intentions.
 
I agree that genesis probably doesn’t have anything to do with the dinosaurs I just was interested by all the similarities between the two and wanted to see what others thought of this interpretation.

As for how the author of the Bible knew-
Wasn’t the bible divinely inspired. How else did the author known about Adam and Eve or Abraham? Adam and Eve are written in Jesus’ genealogies in the Gospels. Their story also tells the origins of original sin so they have to be real. Wouldn’t this show that the bible was divinely inspired?
 
Last edited:
Divinely inspired is not the Same as divinely dictated. Even the genealogies have a more theological than historical purpose. I think Jesus gives us a good clue of Jewish teaching skills. Parables, similes, metaphors.
 
" it [scripture] is led, and spoken to, by God himself, who — through men and their humanity — is at the deepest level the one speaking." - Pope Benedict XVI
I do not know if God dictated every word but the Bible is the word of God and although people wrote the Bible God is the author on a deeper level.
Even if Genesis is not a completely historical account the order of events and their presentation in the first creation story have to have come from somewhere. For example why did the author say the events in the order that he did and why those events if they were not historical?
 
I am glad you speak of the “deepest level”. I don’t think a literal historical interpretation of Genesis gives us that. There is not much doubt that the author or authors of Genesis put into writing oral traditions. Some even borrowed from other Mesopotamian stories.

When I read Genesis I hear that God brings order to chaos, brings light from darkness, creation is good and we should tend it. We have a certain dominion or responsibility over it. And as humans, we are sometimes careless and rebellious and selfish. That is all part of the lingering darkness we are being called out of.

If you compare chapters 1 and 2 does the order not seem a bit different?
 
Last edited:
I first heard of gap theory in 1995 from a young theologian named Greg. I thought he was a genius. Now, I see it here again. Amazing!
 
The first day of creation was this…

God separating the created fallen angels from the non-fallen angels.

This is the separation of dark and light.
 
That can explain why light came before the sun, moon and stars but not why plants were created before them or why the Bible specifies fruit bearing plants.
 
1 In the beginning God created heaven and earth.

2 Now the earth was a formless void, there was darkness over the deep, with a divine wind sweeping over the waters.

3 God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.

4 God saw that light was good, and God divided light from darkness.

5 God called light ‘day’, and darkness he called ‘night’. Evening came and morning came: the first day.

6 God said, ‘Let there be a vault through the middle of the waters to divide the waters in two.’ And so it was.

7 God made the vault, and it divided the waters under the vault from the waters above the vault.

8 God called the vault ‘heaven’. Evening came and morning came: the second day.

9 God said, ‘Let the waters under heaven come together into a single mass, and let dry land appear.’ And so it was.

10 God called the dry land ‘earth’ and the mass of waters ‘seas’, and God saw that it was good.

11 God said, ‘Let the earth produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants, and fruit trees on earth, bearing fruit with their seed inside, each corresponding to its own species.’ And so it was.

12 The earth produced vegetation: the various kinds of seed-bearing plants and the fruit trees with seed inside, each corresponding to its own species. God saw that it was good.

13 Evening came and morning came: the third day.

14 God said, 'Let there be lights in the vault of heaven to divide day from night, and let them indicate festivals, days and years.

15 Let them be lights in the vault of heaven to shine on the earth.’ And so it was.

16 God made the two great lights: the greater light to govern the day, the smaller light to govern the night, and the stars.

17 God set them in the vault of heaven to shine on the earth,

18 to govern the day and the night and to divide light from darkness. God saw that it was good.

19 Evening came and morning came: the fourth day.

20 God said, ‘Let the waters be alive with a swarm of living creatures, and let birds wing their way above the earth across the vault of heaven.’ And so it was.

21 God created great sea-monsters and all the creatures that glide and teem in the waters in their own species, and winged birds in their own species. God saw that it was good.

22 God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful, multiply, and fill the waters of the seas; and let the birds multiply on land.’

23 Evening came and morning came: the fifth day.

24 God said, ‘Let the earth produce every kind of living creature in its own species: cattle, creeping things and wild animals of all kinds.’ And so it was.

25 God made wild animals in their own species, and cattle in theirs, and every creature that crawls along the earth in its own species. God saw that it was good.

26 God said, ‘Let us make man in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves, and let them be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven, the cattle, all the wild animals and all the creatures that creep along the ground.’

11-18 Apparently the light God created would allow plants to grow. The great lights were put in the vault to govern night and day nd let them indicate festivals, days and years.
 
Last edited:
Why is it so hard to believe that an omnipotent God created things just the way He said?

I think too many folks try to fit God into the science they can see instead of realizing God invented the exact science they use to to try and define His creation…just my .02 cents…
 
Because there are those who want to use man’s reasoning of science to discredit the Bible. The point it, we do not have to shrink away from the plain meaning of Scripture.
 
BlueMaxx said:
Why is it so hard to believe that an omnipotent God created things just the way He said?
Click to expand...
I think you meant to say “Why is it so hard to believe that an omnipotent God created things just the way Genesis said?”
 
No, I said it just the way I see and believe it…
None of us were there and therefore it is a mute point to argue…it just comes down to faith I think.
If I start parsing out parts I do not believe in just because they are unbelievable then I think I would soon be left with a pamphlet lest a Bible…
 
Let’s assume the Genesis story is 100% accurate. That still doesn’t mean it is what GOD said rather than what the human author of Genesis said. Why reach for the latter when you don’t need to?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top