«Home

Was There Two Types Of Creation?

Every one that believes in the bible creation should discuss about this.

Looking at the creation account in Genesis, there were two events of creation. Reading from Genesis 1 to Genesis 2:1-3 the ceration was over and God rested on the seventh day. Looking at verse 6 of Genesis 2 shows that there was another creation. looking at the sentence in genesis 2:6[b]---"6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground."[/b].The addition of "but" there shows a change of event or an unlikely occurence. And from Genesis 2:7 God formed only man in contrast to Genesis 1:27 where made male and female:So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them".

If i could get the original Greek or Hebrew version to understand better would be nice because the use of "earth" in both genesis 1 and genesis 2 would not mean the same thing if there were two sepearte creations following both chapter 1 and 2.

Avatar
Newbie
6 answers

cool, i keenly await.

0
Avatar
Newbie

wow! you see this people; two people discussing without threat of world war 3!!! LOL

Nice one sir, we learn daily from ALL those around us; good or bad.

with regards to the example i used, i have thought about JC's reply to his statement but i find it contradicts the fact that he was to remain in the ground 3 days and 3 nights BEFORE the ressurection. there is also the question of prior to the ressurection no one had ascended to heaven yet (i might be wrong)

your thoughts my new found brother!!!

Peace!

0
Avatar
Newbie

its KAG!!!!

the love of my "Nairaland" life! How you doing today!?

0
Avatar
Newbie

While I don't believe in the Bible's creation acccount, I'd like to add my two cents. I don't think the second account was written to be taken literally. The first was written to credit the existence of humans, the world and the Universe to the God of the Israelites as opposed to the other Gods around them, while the second is an allegorical narrative. Otherwise they contradict each other.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Hi,

I think it’s important in how we make corrections to others. I suppose it does not affect me (as i CHOOSE to not let it) but I am sure there might be others that might see your reply as not too friendly. I am not saying this was your intension (it might well have been! LOL) but just how it might be perceived.

I think you will find that the punctuations WILL affect what the text is saying some times.

I draw your attention to the story of the conversation between the thief or criminal on the cross and JC.

According to the punctuation there, “I promise you, today you will be with me in paradise”, the promise to the thief was that, the same day would see him in paradise with JC but if you take the coma and place it one word to the right so it reads “I promise you today, you will be with me in paradise” I am sure you will see that the whole emphasis changes from the promise itself to the day the promise will be realised.

I really like SOME of your posts and I guess that the whole point is that we have different views and opinions but I am sure we can both be civilised adults even when we disagree.

Look forward to getting your reply as I am sure I can learn a lot from you but hopefully with out the naija headmaster comments. LOL

The problem is solved when you can understand that in Jewish thought, events are usually first stated in summary, and later detailed; usually outlining those events according to their spiritual import, rather than to political, social or any other concerns. It is for reason you find Gen. 2:4 recounting "the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created", while in Gen. 5:1 it is rather "the generations of Adam, in the day that God created man"; then in Gen 6:9, you find "the generations of Noah", etc.

I really agree with the above in that I see a lot of scripture being read with out an understanding of the Jewish culture at the time, figures of speech and even slang at the time. I am starting to realise that in order to fully understand scripture, these areas need to be properly looked into.

Any way, enough for now and hope you enjoy the rest of your day.

Peace!

0
Avatar
Newbie

its a nice theory but i see some errors in there;

the first thing we notice in vs 5 is that we do NOT have plants growing BECAUSE there was no rain. then it goes into vs6 that then explains to you were water for plants came from so in essence the creation was together and not separate as you have noted.

the other thing to bear in mind when reading ANY part of scripture is that when it was first written, there were no spaces between the words, no full stops, no question marks. in fact, everything was written in caps all the way through. this means that the inclusion of all the grammatical stuff came at a later date. the translation from original text to English has come with a lot of good and bad points.

0
Avatar
Newbie
Your answer
Add image

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.