• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are there Two Creation Events in Genesis?

JesusBeliever

Active Member
Yes, but are there two different creations?

Are those of the dust of the earth and those made in the likeness of God different?
Hi there, you seem to be picking up on the prophetic picture of the Old & New Man that the Apostle Paul speaks about in His letters. And the Apostle Peter seems to allude to in 1 Peter 3:18-22:

"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." 1 Peter 3:18-22

"Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:" Colossians 3:9-10

"But ye have not so learned Christ; If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: Neither give place to the devil. Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you." Ephesians 4:20-32


The underlined verses above definitely seem to synchronise with the statement in Genesis just prior to the flood:

"And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." Genesis 6:5
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
I do have it but it doesn't change the fact that by default translators make decisions about how things are translated based hot button issues of the day. For example the Geneva translation has inherant biases about the Roman Catholic church. It was the hot topic of the day. Likewise evolution is a hot button issue of today and will impact translations of today. That's way I use translations that predate the evolution argument.
You are right that there are times the denomination of the translator affects how he understands a certain text and thereby its translation. The NIV is an easy to read translation, but contains many poorly translated parts, and so forth with other translations.

That is why I appreciate the number of translations, and Strong's dictionary with KJV, and the Interlinear ones. When faced with difficult issues, this resolves the problems.
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
I appreciate your post. I'm not a Christian so I don't find the Bible inerrant, but I do appreciate the problem of translation.
If there are parts you want an old experienced believers explanation on things, please contact me. I will be happy to look at whatever question you might have.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Wait, how did St. Augustine come into this picture? Are you citing a commentary of his or something?
Saint Augustine;s commentary on Genesis and Creation is relevant to the thread, because it expressed his beliefs based on scripture and commented on his view of the two different versions of Creation in Genesis.

From: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/may/22.39.html

Letting Scripture Speak

North African bishop Augustine of Hippo (354–430) had no skin in the game concerning the current origins controversies. He interpreted Scripture a thousand years before the Scientific Revolution, and 1,500 before Darwin's Origin of Species. Augustine didn't "accommodate" or "compromise" his biblical interpretation to fit new scientific theories. The important thing was to let Scripture speak for itself.

Augustine wrestled with Genesis 1–2 throughout his career. There are at least four points in his writings at which he attempts to develop a detailed, systematic account of how these chapters are to be understood. Each is subtly different. Here I shall consider Augustine's The Literal Meaning of Genesis, which was written between 401 and 415. Augustine intended this to be a "literal" commentary (meaning "in the sense intended by the author").

Augustine draws out the following core themes: God brought everything into existence in a single moment of creation. Yet the created order is not static. God endowed it with the capacity to develop. Augustine uses the image of a dormant seed to help his readers grasp this point. God creates seeds, which will grow and develop at the right time. Using more technical language, Augustine asks his readers to think of the created order as containing divinely embedded causalities that emerge or evolve at a later stage. Yet Augustine has no time for any notion of random or arbitrary changes within creation. The development of God's creation is always subject to God's sovereign providence. The God who planted the seeds at the moment of creation also governs and directs the time and place of their growth.

Augustine argues that the first Genesis Creation account (1:1–2:3) cannot be interpreted in isolation, but must be set alongside the second Genesis Creation account (2:4–25), as well as every other statement about the Creation found in Scripture. For example, Augustine suggests that Psalm 33:6–9 speaks of an instantaneous creation of the world through God's creative Word, while John 5:17 points to a God who is still active within creation.

Further, he argues that a close reading of Genesis 2:4 has the following meaning: "When day was made, God made heaven and earth and every green thing of the field." This leads him to conclude that the six days of Creation are not chronological. Rather, they are a way of categorizing God's work of creation. God created the world in an instant but continues to develop and mold it, even to the present day."

I am not presenting what I believe nor not believe concerning Genesis at this point. I am simply presenting Saint Augustine's commentary on Genesis, because it is a well thought out explanation from his view point and the times he lived.
 
Last edited:

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
There's another explanation. When God said let us make them in our likeness, at the same time gave man authority over all other living things. So mans likeness is his authority and dominion. Man has dominion over ever beast of the field, Christ has dominion over man and God the father has dominion over Christ.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There's another explanation. When God said let us make them in our likeness, at the same time gave man authority over all other living things. So mans likeness is his authority and dominion. Man has dominion over ever beast of the field, Christ has dominion over man and God the father has dominion over Christ.
So it should read, "In the beginning, God created power hierarchies, ordering his creation in terms of superior and inferior, some to be elevated, others to be crushed beneath the heel." That presents a whole list of questions about the nature of this God.
 

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
So it should read, "In the beginning, God created power hierarchies, ordering his creation in terms of superior and inferior, some to be elevated, others to be crushed beneath the heel." That presents a whole list of questions about the nature of this God.

Nature has a balance, the bird eats the worm then the worm eats the bird.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Nature has a balance, the bird eats the worm then the worm eats the bird.
But yet, this is said to have not started until after sin entered the world, children would play happily with their pet velociraptors, riding them about in the garden until sin entered the world and it instantly turned on them, gashing them with it's claws it suddenly grew and tearing their flesh out of their bodies (sounds to me like the raptor was higher up the food chain then the children who thought they were given dominion over him). So you're saying that this order of eating other animals was designed this way before sin? Is that biblical?
 

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
But yet, this is said to have not started until after sin entered the world, children would play happily with their pet velociraptors, riding them about in the garden until sin entered the world and it instantly turned on them, gashing them with it's claws it suddenly grew and tearing their flesh out of their bodies (sounds to me like the raptor was higher up the food chain then the children who thought they were given dominion over him). So you're saying that this order of eating other animals was designed this way before sin? Is that biblical?

It doesn't say anything about Adam and Eve having children until after they sinned. It says Adam lived in the Garden and God would send the animals to Adam to be named, whatever Adam called the creature would be its name. So, in and out of the garden they go.
 

jhwatts

Member
Saint Augustine;s commentary on Genesis and Creation is relevant to the thread, because it expressed his beliefs based on scripture and commented on his view of the two different versions of Creation in Genesis.

From: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/may/22.39.html

Letting Scripture Speak

North African bishop Augustine of Hippo (354–430) had no skin in the game concerning the current origins controversies. He interpreted Scripture a thousand years before the Scientific Revolution, and 1,500 before Darwin's Origin of Species. Augustine didn't "accommodate" or "compromise" his biblical interpretation to fit new scientific theories. The important thing was to let Scripture speak for itself.

Augustine wrestled with Genesis 1–2 throughout his career. There are at least four points in his writings at which he attempts to develop a detailed, systematic account of how these chapters are to be understood. Each is subtly different. Here I shall consider Augustine's The Literal Meaning of Genesis, which was written between 401 and 415. Augustine intended this to be a "literal" commentary (meaning "in the sense intended by the author").

Augustine draws out the following core themes: God brought everything into existence in a single moment of creation. Yet the created order is not static. God endowed it with the capacity to develop. Augustine uses the image of a dormant seed to help his readers grasp this point. God creates seeds, which will grow and develop at the right time. Using more technical language, Augustine asks his readers to think of the created order as containing divinely embedded causalities that emerge or evolve at a later stage. Yet Augustine has no time for any notion of random or arbitrary changes within creation. The development of God's creation is always subject to God's sovereign providence. The God who planted the seeds at the moment of creation also governs and directs the time and place of their growth.

Augustine argues that the first Genesis Creation account (1:1–2:3) cannot be interpreted in isolation, but must be set alongside the second Genesis Creation account (2:4–25), as well as every other statement about the Creation found in Scripture. For example, Augustine suggests that Psalm 33:6–9 speaks of an instantaneous creation of the world through God's creative Word, while John 5:17 points to a God who is still active within creation.

Further, he argues that a close reading of Genesis 2:4 has the following meaning: "When day was made, God made heaven and earth and every green thing of the field." This leads him to conclude that the six days of Creation are not chronological. Rather, they are a way of categorizing God's work of creation. God created the world in an instant but continues to develop and mold it, even to the present day."

I am not presenting what I believe nor not believe concerning Genesis at this point. I am simply presenting Saint Augustine's commentary on Genesis, because it is a well thought out explanation from his view point and the times he lived.

I can see his perspective as certain books such as Psalm, Proverbs, Ezekiel, and Job seem to point to the Genesis 2.5 through Genesis 4:26 creation. This creation takes place prior to Genesis 1.2. We can see this from Genesis 2.4

Notice in Psalms 33:6, the reference to “breath of his mouth”. We see this same language in Genesis 2:7. We see this at other places. Look at Elihu in the book of Job at Jon 33: (4-6). He seems to understand he was made from the dust.

They are two distinct creations spoke about in Genesis. One is the original creation in earths distant past while the other is a recreation that corresponds to what most call the 7 day creation.

Genesis 1:2 through Genesis 2:3 corresponds to a second recreation. That is why they are told to replenish the earth in Genesis 1:28.

The chronology is simply out of order in the book of Genesis. Look the end of chapter 10 and the beginning of chapter 11. Notice in 10 there are many languages and the start of 11 it states there is only one language. This is because the chronology of the book is not correct.
 

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
There is a creation account and then a 're-creation' account in Genesis 1.

Genesis 1:1 is the creation of the heavens and the earth, when Lucifer, or whatever you'd like to call him, was ruler over the earth. Isaiah 14:12-20 tells the story of his fall and how the world was destroyed the first time, that's why Genesis 1:2 says the world was void, had no form and covered with water. Ezekiel 28:12-15 tells of his rule. He was in Eden, the "garden of God full of wisdom and in perfect beauty", so it couldn't have been the same garden that Adam and Eve were in because he was a serpent in that garden, he wasn't "covered with every precious stone". There's millions or even billions of years between Genesis verse 1 and verse 2.

We can see that Lucifer was on the earth, because Isaiah 14:13 says, "you said in your heart, I will ascend to heaven, above the stars of God". If Lucifer was in heaven and not on the earth, why would he "ascend to heaven"?
 

jhwatts

Member
There is a creation account and then a 're-creation' account in Genesis 1.

Genesis 1:1 is the creation of the heavens and the earth, when Lucifer, or whatever you'd like to call him, was ruler over the earth. Isaiah 14:12-20 tells the story of his fall and how the world was destroyed the first time, that's why Genesis 1:2 says the world was void, had no form and covered with water. Ezekiel 28:12-15 tells of his rule. He was in Eden, the "garden of God full of wisdom and in perfect beauty", so it couldn't have been the same garden that Adam and Eve were in because he was a serpent in that garden, he wasn't "covered with every precious stone". There's millions or even billions of years between Genesis verse 1 and verse 2.

We can see that Lucifer was on the earth, because Isaiah 14:13 says, "you said in your heart, I will ascend to heaven, above the stars of God". If Lucifer was in heaven and not on the earth, why would he "ascend to heaven"?

Yes, this is interesting because we do not see the Garden of Eden mentioned in Genesis 1:2 – Genesis 2:3 but we see Lucifer was in the Garden while on earth. Something changed at Genesis 1:2. See Ezekiel 28, and Ezekiel 31.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Since I treat the creation and flood narratives as allegory, no conflict for me.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It doesn't say anything about Adam and Eve having children until after they sinned. It says Adam lived in the Garden and God would send the animals to Adam to be named, whatever Adam called the creature would be its name. So, in and out of the garden they go.
Ken Ham, the great slayer of science, seems to disagree with you as he has children riding on Dinosaurs in his fabulous Noah's Ark exhibit. You can see images of his story books here with kids riding velociraptors. Every Day Is Like Wednesday: (Not a comics) Review: Ken Ham's Creationism-for-kids book, Dinosaurs of Eden

According to not just him, but Christianity Today, all animals were vegetarian before the Flood. Therefore, God did not create a birds-eat-worms hierarchy as you proposed. Apparently it was a bit more egalitarian and less power hierarchy than you imagined. Thoughts? http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/october/39.104.html

(By the way, I consider the whole bypassing of actual science, as in the above two interpretations of Genesis, to be not only absurd, but obscene).
 

jhwatts

Member
A little more fuel for the fire.

What happens when both creations come together and have a offspring?

Genesis 6: (4-6)

Is this what the creation story of Genesis is really telling?

Revisit my first post and review the scripture I displayed.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
A little more fuel for the fire.

What happens when both creations come together and have a offspring?

Genesis 6: (4-6)

Is this what the creation story of Genesis is really telling?

Revisit my first post and review the scripture I displayed.
There were all manner of magical goings on back then before the natural world we have today emerged. It was a veritable world of magical creatures, much like the imaginations found in the fantasies of five year olds today. You will note however that all unicorns and leprechauns were also drowned along with the other supernatural beings that bred with our females, which is why they live only in our story books, such as Genesis before the flood. God did us all favor getting rid of them because we needed to start focusing on understanding the world, and flying angels only held us back from digging into the sciences to understand the natural order of things. Besides, it's bad enough for guys to get some girl to have sex with them, without these supernatural beings edging in on their action. Thanks God!
 

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Ken Ham, the great slayer of science, seems to disagree with you as he has children riding on Dinosaurs in his fabulous Noah's Ark exhibit. You can see images of his story books here with kids riding velociraptors. Every Day Is Like Wednesday: (Not a comics) Review: Ken Ham's Creationism-for-kids book, Dinosaurs of Eden

According to not just him, but Christianity Today, all animals were vegetarian before the Flood. Therefore, God did not create a birds-eat-worms hierarchy as you proposed. Apparently it was a bit more egalitarian and less power hierarchy than you imagined. Thoughts? Vegetarians in Paradise

(By the way, I consider the whole bypassing of actual science, as in the above two interpretations of Genesis, to be not only absurd, but obscene).

The bird still has greater status than the worm.
 
Top