Two groups of people insist that Genesis and modern science are incompatible: Secularists and Young Earth Creationists. Both camps have damaged the credibility of the Jewish creation story. But today I would like to suggest to you that there’s a 3rd way. A modern literal interpretation of Genesis 1 matches modern cosmology, geology and the fossil record… exactly. As we read this chapter together, I would like to make three simple assumptions:
1) The events are described as they appear from the surface of the earth beginning with verse 2.
2) We’re going to assume “day” is a period of time, not 24 hours. The Hebrew word for day (“yom”) has a variety of meanings in Genesis. A “day” can be a million or even a billion years.
3) Living creatures in verse 24 are “livestock” – not all land animals, but advanced mammals.
| Genesis | Science |
| 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. | The text literally means “At the beginning of time God (who already existed) created everything out of nothing.” Today we understand that the Big Bang was the beginning of matter, energy, space and even time itself, all expanding from a single point in a very precise manner. The Big Bang theory was resisted for decades in part because of its resemblance to Genesis 1 and its metaphysical implications. |
| 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. | This verse establishes the physical vantage point that is used from here forward. 4 billion years ago, following the “Hadean” period, the earth was a hostile, stormy, turbulent, water-covered ball. The Hebrew word for “hovering” is also used elsewhere in Genesis to describe an eagle protecting her young in the nest. Science tells us that the earliest life forms began in the ocean ~3.5 billion years ago and I believe this verse hints at this. |
| 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day. | The atmosphere changes from dark to opaque. Light can now shine through earth’s thick clouds. Now there is day and night on the surface of the earth. The phrase “There was evening and there was morning” is an ancient Jewish expression of completion. |
| 6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning-the second day. | The water cycle begins. Clouds condense and form the ocean. Water evaporates from the ocean and forms clouds. |
| 9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good. | The continents (“Pangea”) rise above the surface of the ocean, forming land and sea. |
| 11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning-the third day. | Plants appear before animals. Notice that the wording in the Bible says the land produced vegetation. It does not rule out an evolutionary process. |
| 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights-the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning-the fourth day. | Up to this point the atmosphere has been thick and opaque. It is not possible to see the sun and moon as distinct objects in the sky. The atmosphere clears. Now sun and moon are visible. When it says “God made two great lights, the Hebrew word for “made” is a different word than “create.” Create means from scratch, made means “made evident.” The moon and stars were already casting their light on day 1 (see verse 3), but were not visible as distinct objects until day 4. Notice that 24 hour days are not even mentioned before day 4. |
| 20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning-the fifth day. | Day 5 spans from 500 million years ago (after the Cambrian explosion) to 50 million years ago. The earth is dominated by birds and fish. Insects and dinosaurs are also present on the earth during this time but are not mentioned in Genesis 1. |
| 24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. | Day 6 is the busiest day (50 million years ago to less than 100,000 years ago). The earth is dominated by large mammals. Jewish people would have thought in terms of livestock. |
| 26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” | God refers to Himself as “our” – God is plural. The first reference to the Trinity. |
| 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. | Man is a spiritual being, the first creature made in God’s image. Unlike the animals, man is both body and spirit. |
| 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” | Man is given responsibility to take care of the earth. |
| 29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground-everything that has the breath of life in it-I give every green plant for food.” And it was so. | |
| 31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning-the sixth day. | The text says all was very good. It doesn’t say it was paradise or perfection. |
| Chapter 2 verse 1: Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. 2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. | God ceases from his creative work on the 7th day. There is no statement “And there was evening and there was morning, a 7th day.” We are living in the 7th day now. |
If we had to make obtuse, complex assumptions in order to make this fit, we would have a serious problem. But our assumptions are simple, even elegant. This poetic 3500 year old text matches modern science exactly.
As little as 100 years ago, the prevailing scientific view disagreed with Genesis 1 (the “steady state” theory of the universe was in vogue). Genesis produced a testable hypothesis. Since then, astronomy, geology and biology have shown Genesis was right and the science of the time was wrong.
No other ancient text, scripture or religious tradition has a creation story that even comes close to Genesis in its accuracy. The Jewish scriptures compete admirably in the marketplace of ideas in the 21st century.
How did a bunch of nomads roaming around in the desert in 1500 BC get this sequence of events exactly right? I submit to you it’s because God told his prophets what He did.
Elsewhere on this site I make an bold case that living things have a Designer. I argue that evolution is not random or accidental, but an engineered process. But it’s the remarkable accuracy of Genesis that persuades me to be a Christian and not an agnostic or deist.
Augustine said, “God wrote two books: The Bible and the book of Nature.” It’s important to acknowledge that modern science also informs our interpretation of Genesis. Each tells us about the other.
In an upcoming post I’ll look into Genesis 2 and the origin of man and woman.
I invite you to listen to Hugh Ross’s lecture “New Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God” where he explores the history of Big Bang science and its relation to Genesis in much greater detail.
Perry Marshall
Download The First 3 Chapters of Evolution 2.0 For Free, Here – https://evo2.org/evolution/Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here – https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0
Qraal, I hope I spelled your name correctly. I appreciate your comments. However, it still seems interesting to me that so many people are so quick to bash the YEC ideas. People like Mark get so upset that they want to break something. Why??? Ideas can come in all forms and sizes. Some so big and hard to swallow and we think they just must be wrong because our mother or our professor taught us a different way and of course they must be right. If the theory fits, allow it to exist until more information is present to disprove it. Evolution is still a theory! The YEC may still be a theory but I think it closer agrees with the Bible and evidence I see in nature. Do you know how scientist prove that some rock is 150 million years old?? It was found in a strata of earth that they say was 150 million years old. Yea, and how old is the strata of Earth well, obviously it is 150 million of years because Professor XYZ says it was found in a strata of earth with a rock that was 150 million years old.
Well, why do they believe that? Because it is more palatable for those who believe that evolution must be true because even though the laws in science say it can’t happen they believe in long periods of time for the complexity of the eye to develop and something truly can come from nothing and start thinking on its own. And you call that science?? Why is it not more logical to believe God created it and the whole creation is a miracle! Have a nice day Roger
Perry – I would love to see a treatment like this for the flood story. I really enjoyed your post and it made a great deal of sense to me.
I also hope you find the reference of the Rabbi who determined the age of the universe to be 13.7 years old. I would dearly love to read his thesis.
God Bless,
mik
Mikitta,
It’ll probably be a long time before my studies get me to an exposition of the flood story. But one book you might want to check out is “The Genesis Question” by Hugh Ross. http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Question-Scientific-Advances-Accuracy/dp/1576832309/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1291740297&sr=8-3
As for the Rabbi who determined the age of the universe to be 13.7 billion years old, that’s from “Immortality, Resurrection and the Age of the Universe: A Kabbalistic View” by Aryeh Kaplan, in the first chapter. http://www.amazon.com/Immortality-Resurrection-Age-Universe-Kabbalistic/dp/0881253456/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1291740077&sr=8-2
Hi David of Hawaii
I spent a year on Ford Island at Pearl. And 3 or 4 short visits on a, Carrier CVA-41 USS MIDWAY in the early 60’s. Great weather their in Hawaii. We got so board , we would walk around the Island.
Just wanted to say…I on the road you traveled in your Spiritual career it sounds like.
We need to think about the generations that follow us and what will happen to Christianity.
We get the 16th century mind set in most Christian settings, that I have encountered. If we come to the same conclusion, that recorded history is completely incorrect in the Bible and can’t be supported with scientific facts. I hope they get the issue correct with the sin nature. The KJV sets many battles fought in the name of God.
History tells us of wars fought in the name of religion. Not much difference today, in fact we have war colleges for military personnel.
Nice hatchet job on God’s Word, Perry. Proverbs 30:5–6 states that “every word of God is pure … . Do not add to His words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar.” In the original autographs, every word and letter in the Bible is there because God put it there. Let us listen to God speaking to us through His Word and not arrogantly think we can tell God what He really means! http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/could-god-have-created-in-six-days
And way to throw your Bible-believing Christian brothers under the bus. I got news for you, your Lord and Savior is a young-earth creationist too. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/did-jesus-say-he-created-in-six-days
There simply isn’t any good reason to believe in the big bang. It is not compatible with the Bible, and it’s not good science. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/big-bang-gods-chosen-method
With all this said, I still like you and appreciate your intentions with this blog. I think you make some very thought-provoking arguments.
I threw Forrest under the bus for his obnoxious and decidedly unchristian behavior. When Christians are more judgmental and unkind than the atheists, I consider that a problem. I gave him multiple warnings and he stridently persisted in his name calling and accusations. So I banned him. Do you think I should have let him continue?
Let’s look at what Jesus says in Mark 10:6:
But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’
What does Genesis 1:27 say?
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
Either Jesus is contradicting the sequence of Genesis 1:27, or Jesus is referring specifically to the creation of man, not the creation of the universe.
Based on the context which do you think is the case?
Please notice in the very next verse Jesus says
‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.
What is Jesus quoting here? Genesis 2.
Where in Mark does Jesus make any statement about the age of the earth?
This article about the Big Bang makes some very serious non-sequiturs. The first being that the Big Bang is a naturalistic account of the creation of the universe. If you believe in cause and effect the BB requires a cause that is outside of space and time. How is that naturalistic?
The article you cite completely ignores the fact that there’s no end to the 7th day. We’re in the 7th day, the day of rest, now. See Hebrews 4.
Sorry for the confusion. I didn’t even see Forrest’s comments. I was referring to your attitude in general toward young-earth creationists and your comparison of Ken Ham’s arguments to Richard Dawkins’ arguments.
As for your other points, and repeating part of my reply from another comment, I would say that all of your objections and criticisms are properly addressed in the Answers in Genesis literature.
I think we both would agree that the scientific aspects of creation are secondary in importance to the gospel. I may be a bit peeved, but I’m delighted to know that ultimately we share the same faith in Christ.
Mr. Marshall
Your introductory blog is excellent and covers all the points necessary to start the living planet in motion.
I nocticed you didn’t give any time to the, “gap theory”, between Genesis 1:1- 2. The hypothesis states the earth was created much earlier in a perfect state and something happened.
Mr. Marshall
You present excellent questions, in your lack of understanding of Christians not practicing the whole council of God, I’m in your corner. Denying God’s Spirit freedom is a form of blasphemy. I never considered.
Different religions focus on different worship practices. There is the Greek Orthodox Church (the Christ Church)…the first church. All other religions and sects come from the the Greeks, there are many.
Have you read this article: http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48951136.html or his book Genesis and the Big Bang? If so, what do you think [the article is shorter and, I think, more up to date]?
This is a great site. I don’t believe anyone will argue that the Torah is a more accurite description and translation of the original than the Bible. I don’t know why the Bible has been accepted as an accurie translation, since its first copy.
The Sea Scrolls verify the Torah and Hebrew writings. The Bible was King James idea.
Nothing has ever verified the New Testament but it seems to be eaiser to comply with than Judaism.
My personal opinion is humanity develpoed the ideas of Christianity and made it tax deductible.
Good information in general on this web site and the book also.
Today scientist digging under Death Valley California have unearthed the oldest living things on earth, 34,000 year old cells.
I’m a 17 year old christian girl who takes an interest in theology and the ideologies surrounding christianity. What I don’t understand though is why people, usually christians and atheists would spend hours arguing over topics of discussion that I trust God could answer. I can almost picture God laughing as He sees man trying to fight His battles for Him. The Bible does outline the dangers of trying to hold intellectual discussions with unbelievers in an attempt to draw them in. (You all sound so educated and knowledgeable with the whole singularity big bang yadi yada but what do you aim to achieve by all this? Satisfaction? The wisdom of man cannot even begin to compare with the foolishness of God *)Those we speak to about the spirit who do not have the spirit in them take all we say as gibberish. So why bother?
Don’t mis-use your youth.
Mr, Marshall has proposed the hypothisis, ” If you can read this, I can prove God exists”.
The hypothesis is founded on the language of DNA. This is a good application of the working language of our genetic make up.
Mr. Marshall, Mr.Gitt,and Mr. Schroeder agree that we are the highest form of intelligence.
All living cells share a common thread, LIFE.
The universe is most likely full of life.
Unfortunately, Mr. Marshall’s hypothesis is only a different prespective of the old theory of creationism.
The related science is great at least for me and my study of the human genome.
God gave man an inquisitive mind. As long as the discussions don’t become arguments, I think it is ok. I usually start my discussions by acknowledging the brilliance of the person I am talking to. Then it is less likey the discussion will become an argument.
Hi guys i could use some help with a certain topic that i need ure opinion in it:
I am a very skeptic person especially when it comes to relgion and science …
i have always thought that god and religion will never cross or agree on something till recently i found out they do… and they do in the muslim religion…
what i found out is that newly discovered issues were mentioned in the quran that was written 1400 years ago… i know its crazy but thats true…plz be open minded…
the expansion of the universe was mentioned in quran… so is the big bang…
atoms… the sounds that a neutrino star makes ( sounds like someone knocking on a wooden door), that men are responsible for the gender of the baby ( X and Y chromosomes), death and birth of stars, the phases of an embro ( morula, blastula… ) those stuff cannot be known 1400 years ago …
i know its crazy, its gonna take u some time to check but plz check this website
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_02.html
check the scientific miracles of the quoran section and plz explains to me how can this be known 1400 yrs ago???????????????????????????
especially those sections:
A RED ROSE IN THE SKY: THE ROSETTE NEBULA
THE EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE
PULSARS: PULSATING STARS
THE END OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE BIG CRUNCH
SUB-ATOMIC PARTICLES
CREATION IN SIX DAYS
If one believes God is all knowing and all powerful and always present then one would have to believe God can reveal anthing to man anytime He wants. Someone said man invented science to study the physical world in which we live or the universe or what may be a very small part of God’s creation. Can we even begin to comprehend a being that could create time and the universe? Many of us can’t even grasp that such a being can even exist.
Hi Sam91b, TOCB,
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: Jn 17:21
God worketh all in all. ICor 12:26
…that God may be all in all. ICor 15:28
Christ is all and in all. Col 3:11
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all and in you all. Eph 4:6
IMHO, God, the Great Spirit, the Force, the Essence, or whatever our little mind tries to conceive of him is the Spirit that created the Sentient Universe(s) for ITs own experiencing and learning.
We are ITs hands, feet, ears, and eyes in this 3D world. As Jesus said “Ye are gods.”
Our brains simply are not big enough to know all that there is to know.
God reveals ITself more on a need to know more than a want to know basis in all ages through may individuals. Some of those people have recorded what they have received such as Enoch, Moses, the patriarchs and prophets, Ezekiel, the disciples of Jesus, and even as you mention, to the writers of the quoran. That does not mean that it has always been recorded perfectly, or that the followers always understood it perfectly.
Unfortunately, many of the disciples interpret what may be a personal revelation to the individual as an opportunity to kill or enslave others even as the white man for years used the rape of Noah by Ham as an excuse to enslave the black races.
The Universe is a vast and violent world. We are part of it.(Jesus said at trial, “MY Kingdom is not of this world”). Many study beauty(design), seemingly loving it. Jesus said; “Love not the world, neither the things in the world.” While the world (Earth particularly) is studied to confirm Scripture, another application of Genesis has gone unnoticed.
A point origin of planetary matter falsifies the various solar nebula theories and at the same time negates our planet as the site of Genesis 1 creation, I call it HAND CALCULATOR GENESIS. It is surprising that beginning with no reliance on Scripture, a plausible ecosystem.outline matches Genesis 1.
Our present world of planets is derivable from that worlds return to chaos. The calculation is not above sophomore physics. It does not merge science and religion. It separates them since the myth predates the scientific evidence.
A recent lesson in Genesis; a question was presented,” was there death before the fall”?
I began to brain storm and have concluded Adam and Eve couldn’t have known what death was because their access to the Tree of Life hadn’t yet been blocked. Many people use the word restore when talking about the death of Jesus but we still don’t have access to the Tree of Life. Humanity has always had acess to God.
Before Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate from the tree of knowledge (not sure what that means), it would seem they did not grasp the concept of death or apparently obedience. But didn’t they die a spiritual death at the moment of disobedience and thus, the fall of man? I don’t “understand” any of the bible. I accept it by faith. It seems this forum is attempting to “understand” God. I think we can discover things scientifically and get revelations spiritually, but I don’t think man is capable of “understanding” God.
“If we had to make obtuse, complex assumptions in order to make this fit, we would have a serious problem. But our assumptions are simple, even elegant. This poetic 3500 year old text matches modern science exactly.”
@Perry – The overwhelming amount of selective interpretations made here is truly astounding. It’s both sad and frustrating knowing that so many people are going to look at this and allow their confirmation bias to consume it all as evidence. Even if you claim your assumptions are “simple”, which I disagree with, the sheer number of assumptions made here make this an incredibly unlikely scenario. You seem to believe that no matter how many assumptions are made, so long as they are “simple”, it’s still fair to claim your final conclusion lines up “exactly” with modern science. Wither intentional or not, this is intellectually dishonest.
With significantly fewer assumptions, I can make virtually every daily astrological prediction line up with any random day of my life. Just because something can be made to fit with several “simple” assumptions doesn’t make it accurate or reliable in the least.
I assumed that “day” is a period of time and the story describes what is seen by an earthly observer – I make two assumptions and I note that the chronology of the story is exactly right.
No other religion can make this claim.
No atheist account of the origin of the universe prior to the recent discoveries of modern science can make this claim either.
The only written document in history which can make this claim is the book of Genesis.
All of are so much more learned than I. I wish I had discovered this long ago. I just watched the first video. My question is, scientifically,not biologically but by intelligent design, how the Word become flesh?
Perry, I’ve read a lot of these blogs and there are so many things that are not being discussed that I believe are pertinent to the issues being discussed. It can change the whole outcome of many of the exclamations being discussed. Let’s look a few. Let’s go back to the very beginning when God said “Let there be light” What happened, really? Before God said “Let there be light”, what was the state of things. If God always existed, was it a world of darkness and how long was this darkness? When he created this light, which appeared to be the sun (bigger light) and moon (smaller light), did you ever wonder how that really is interpreted. God is suppose to be everywhere, and he is suddenly creating the earth and moon, what about all the other trillions of suns, moons, planets, galaxies and so forth. Were they created already or later? Who was God talking to in the dark? Why was he in the dark in the first place? Was he really in the dark or did he do this whole process millions of times with other worlds before ours? We talk about the Big Bang as if was the beginning of our situation, but doesn’t it involve the entire cosmos (all the universe, galaxies). We live in the Milky Way galaxy, one of trillions of galaxies. It seems like you are talking as if everything involved just our known solar system or galaxy. And if God is a spirit and is everywhere, what was he creating? Of all the trillions of galaxies, are we the only one being discussed here? If God did his experiment on this earth, he could have did it many times in other universes or galaxies. We look at the stars (zodiac) and talk about all the constellations, even the Bible talks of them. That only makes sense from man’s point of sight, not God’s. There is no Zodiac from his point of view everything just is. The design is what we have made it and does not make any sense to other worlds in far away galaxies, yet those worlds do exist. I would think this whole process would have to be reinterpreted with other creatures or with us if we go to other points in the cosmos. These questions have to be addressed just as much as trying to find out what happen at the big bang in relation to just us here on earth. God or whatever was the originator of everything, if there is such a thing, is what we are trying to define. I don’t think we are very close to doing that. There are hundreds of unanswered questions that cause problems with the solutions now being proposed as answers to very complex questions. I think you and many people know that when someone doesn’t know the answer to a problem and one hasn’t been found, one can just say anything as long as it can’t be disproved. And that is what is going on time after time. It amazes me how you propose your DNA code theory as one of those solutions and since most people can’t disprove it, you take a giant leap to Christianity being the conclusive answer, without commenting on all these other things and so many more things that have not yet been proposed or answered. Even if the DNA code theory was correct, it does not prove Christianity as the only way. Understand I’m not saying it’s not, I’m just saying you have to have a lot more than you have to make that assumption. There is no doubt that this DNA code, the way you present it, is something to be reckoned with, but so are all these other questions. You appear to be very narrow-minded with this thing. You need to open your mind and think outside the box. You are wondering around in our solar system as a little boy when you have great, great, great great, relatives lost in galaxies, trillions of light years away seeing a different perspective. If you think you can force your ideas into this little box and expect everybody to believe it without the facts, you are very deluded. I don’t mean that as a slam, I mean it as truth and realistic. I would so much like to believe what you say is true, but I see so much information and situations that cause so much doubt. I believe that everything man has learned so far should be taken into account when trying to explain such things as the beginning of all things. For example, religion, science, archeology, biology, psychology, and I could go on and on and name hundreds of things. They all have their place and experts. Everything should come together in a smooth flowing process. They should support each other. Your solutions don’t do that, they have unanswered questions, hundreds of them. Man has such a short life to try and understand all things enough to know what really caused all of what we know. It’s fun searching and researching all these things, but when we get an answer as you propose, we just stop and cease to be productive. I believe you need to stop trying to put the solution into a box. Get out of the box and find out what is going on, without bias, and stop having an agenda. Report the facts and continue doing your work. As things are factually revealed, then report. When you decide to exercise your right to opinion, say that. It’s opinion, not facts. We will base our opinions off your facts, not your opinions, because we have just as many opinions as you, probably more, but the facts are what are required before we can make an educated opinion. I want the truth in this life. I did not asked to be here and I am not asking to not be here, so I’m forced to deal with everything while I am here. I want to get it right. Now I feel I’ve did much talking and you probably only heard a part of what I’ve said. I just want you to really think about God (all powerful, omnipotent, all knowing, everything where, spirit and physics). There are so many questions that can only be answered by just saying God just make it happen. When you use that approach, you lose, because anyone can say that. If a person could conclusively prove evolution, then creation would be false and likewise. We need facts. No matter how much facts we have, there is always be theory, because we will never know it all. If you want to be true and a person that can be trusted, stick to the facts (only) and when you address theory, just say that. With or without the Bible, I can prove God exists and I can also with or without the Bible prove he doesn’t. And that is a problem. Only because I don’t have an agenda, I want the truth; because it appears that my life may depend on it. I don’t worry about pleasing a certain group of people. I don’t believe there is any difference between Christians or Atheists except a label. I’ve met good and bad in both. They are both fools when they say they know there is a God or a Devil, or there is not a God or a Devil. They are fine if they say they believe/disbelieve in God or Devil. If anyone can go further than that, I’m all ears, just present the facts, but you will have to prove it just like I would have to prove anything I say to you. That is my opinion, which is an ongoing work to be adjusted with the facts at anytime and anywhere. I know that the fact only take us so far, then come belief, faith, or whatever you want to call it and I can deal with that. OK, it’s time to stop, I’ve said a lot, yet I’ve said nothing.
Your first question indicates that, however many blogs you’ve read, you didn’t yet read the one you’re commenting on now. Could you please begin by reading what’s here thoroughly, then we can discuss. Also it would help if you could write in manageable paragraphs, big blocks of text are hard to read.
Dear iwtk,
In this extremely busy world I get 50 or more emails a day from Politics to Health to “Save the Sea Turtles. Most get deleted but I still have over 2500 unread emails that might interest me some day. Perry probably gets ten times that. No one has time to read long disjointed articles to pick out your questions that may already be explained in his writings.
Your last sentence said it all and I quote, “I’ve said a lot, yet I’ve said nothing.”
Write simply,
Question One?
Question Two?
To reply to a few of your questions, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION:
1. ALL so called FACTS that are that are written by men are only OPINIONS.
2. IMHO, The universe is SENTIENT, therefore the Spirit which inhabits the Universe is variously called “God,” “The Source,” “The Force,” “The Great Spirit,” etc. John 4:24 “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”
Every place “God” goes there is light. 1 John 1:5 “This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.”
3. Yes, IMHO, there are many other Universes. http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-scientists-evidence-universes.html (PhysOrg.com) — By looking far out into space and observing what’s going on there, scientists have been led to theorize that it all started with a Big Bang, immediately followed by a brief period of super-accelerated expansion called inflation. Perhaps this was the beginning of everything, but lately a few scientists have been wondering if something could have come before that, setting up the initial conditions for the birth of our universe.
4. The Bible was written from “Mans” perspective. IMHO, Perry’s opening section in “A Closer Look at Genesis 1” explains the Biblical sequence perfectly.
My first reply gives my OPINION on how man was created “in their image” by intermediate beings who looked just like us. NO ONE, including Perry and many other pastors, have ever reputed that using scriptures. Yes, there were many other created beings long before “God” got around to us. The Bible talks about angels, fallen angels, cherubim, seraphim, and “wars in the heavens” long before man was created. Mankind has not learned from history, therefore we are repeating the events that led to atomic warfare 10,000 years ago.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vimanas/esp_vimanas_2a.htm
“Prof. D. K. Kanjilal analyses the legend of the Matsya Purana (chapters 129) in his Vimana in Ancient India in the following words:
“Behind the veil of legend and scientific truth comes out that three flying-cities were made for and were used by the demons. Of these three, one was in a stationary orbit in the sky, another moving in the sky and one was permanently stationed in the ground. These were docked like modern spaceships in the sky at particular time and at fixed latitude/longitudes. Siva’s arrow obviously referred to a blazing missile fired from a flying satellite specially built for the purpose and the brunt spaceship fell in the Indian ocean. Vestiges of onetime prosperous civilization destroyed in battles only flicker through these legends.”
David, thank for your opinion. These are the kinds of articles that pose lots of questions and comments. I get your point on the lengthy blocks of text with questions all over the place. I will work on that. I don’t know that I agree with you on the facts are opinions thing. Facts are facts if they are really facts. That’s what I want. Theory is opinion; at times very good opinions when they are based on good facts. They have the ability to reveal theory as eventual facts. We have lots facts in this world but we want to know answers to things that are still in the theory stage. The Indian legends remind me of the legends and myths in the Bible. Every culture has stories like these and is very similar. Even today we are at a technological point in time that if we get destroy again like many times in the past, if there are any survivors, depending on who they are, we may look like gods. I do believe man has risen and fallen at times throughout the history of the earth, but I don’t know it. I do believe there are aliens of some kind, but I don’t know that I believe they have visited earth yet. If our planet has risen and fallen, there’s probably has as well. I’m waiting on the proof (facts), not the theories. I enjoy the theories but the facts are what matters. We may be waiting a very long time before anyone disproves the legends and myths that have happened throughout the millennia. I believe whatever has caused man to rise and fall was because of man and not spirits, devils, or things like that. I don’t know, I just believe. That’s what the evidence has showed, so far. I like reading all the writings though, sometimes I almost believe some of them until I research them out.
iwtk says:
“Theory is opinion; at times very good opinions when they are based on good facts. They have the ability to reveal theory as eventual facts.”
If you want “Facts” stick to 1st person accounts. You can’t even prove to me that you are a human being. You could be an Artificial Intelligence computer or an Extraterrestrial. Or I might be. You could tell me anything, that you are black, white, blue or green, and I would assume that you are telling the truth as long as your story was consistent.
If two or three witnesses, even though mistaken, claimed that you committed a crime, backed up by circumstantial and erroneous DNA evidence, you could be sentenced and executed. The Jury has to reach a verdict, “guilty,” “not guilty,” or “undecided” on the information available to them but if guilty, YOU will still be dead. Only “Fact” in the case.
If an small asteroid falls on your head, and you tell a friend who tells his uncle’s cousin’s aunt, etc, etc. By the time the information gets to me, it is only a legend. If you tell me yourself, it is not a “fact” to me. I did not see it happen and I can not reproduce the event.
So:
If astronomers present a theory about the Big Bang with a sequence of events following which meets the criteria of most of the evidence found by Archeologists, Biologists, Geologists, and by other scientists to date, and this same sequence of events is written about 4000 years ago in the Bible as well as also being told in numerous “creation hymns” by Indians, Sumerians, Akkadians, Mayan, the Iroquois, and other ancient tribes, then the acceptance is up to you. Yes, no, or maybe. You will not find any “FACTS.”
Common Elements in Creation Myths by Lindsey Murtagh
http://www.cs.williams.edu/~lindsey/myths/myths.html
At the foundation of nearly every culture is a creation myth that explains how the wonders of the earth came to be
iwtk, you are still not writing in paragraphs. In any case theory is a suggested or potential explanation of facts. Theories can often assume some other details or interpretations if you like. However a theory is not a fact per sec.
It can be argued a good theory is what gives understanding to data/facts. Weaker theories are those which are suggested but have few facts and many assumptions that are weaved together into a scenario. These two kinds of theories are not undesirable but part of speculative or theoretical science. These can be falsified, amended and improved due to new discoveries.
The weakest theories are those that pile myths upon myths or assumptions upon assumptions and yet include the claim to be true. These theories are those that appeal to the revelation of gods, ET’s or other non-proven entities or X factors. In many cases it is said you have to believe this stuff … however it cannot be tested and/or falsified.
Download my free essay “The Three “S’s” of Science and the Physics of Humpty Dumpty” @ http://antspub.com Click on any Downloads key at the top of any page.
Perry I’ve watched your Origins of Life Video months ago and have been reading these blogs since then. I’ve really been interested in it, but I’ve had so many questions. The more comment people make, the more question and comment I’ve wanted to participate in. A few days ago I joined the blog and started asking questions and making comments. I’m only aware of around five blogs within Cosmic Fingerprints. If I’ve missed some, you need to let me know what they are. I’m not sure why you said what you did base on the first question I asked in my reply above. I have not read an answer to that question or other questions I’ve addressed that satisfy my concerns. I have not seen anyone come from the approach I’ve used. Granted, I did write a long entry of information but I’ve had a lot of things in my mind reading all these stuff. I started talking to you the way I did because I figured you would easily comprehend since you have had so much to say to all these people. But instead of answering my questions, you just say I haven’t read this blog. Why would you do that? The only reason I’m asking questions and commenting is because I’ve read the blog and I’ve got questions that were not addressed with an answer that made sense to me. So I’m asking different questions and coming from different angles in an effort to get some new information that will hopefully provide some more insight. I don’t intend to chop my above entry into little pieces for you to comment on. You can take your time and answer accordingly. I will try to make any future entries to you smaller; I understand information overload. I was not thinking of that when I was writing to you. I know I have a habit of writing to much at once. One time I did a 22,000 work reply to someone. I will try not to do that to you.
Sir,
If you could use paragraphs with only 2-4 sentences each, followed by a carriage return, that would be a huge help.
You can read all the different articles on the site and see the list at http://www.evo2.org/blog
If you read the article at the top of this page, you see that the Genesis story is told from the vantage point of the surface of the earth so the sun and moon were already there starting at day 2. This is all described in the grid above. I think this will answer quite a few of your questions, then we can go from there.
Perry, to start I am a facts-based person first. I consider theory second. While there are facts in the Bible, there is a lot of theory. The theory is what gets the attention of people because it seems to have a bearing on where we may end up after this life.
The scientific fact is we are here, the earth is here, and the universe exists. How all that happened according to the Bible is theory.
There are a lot of theories out there in the world, because there are a lot of thinking people out there. We want to know what is correct, not what we think is correct, but what is correct.
A lot of theory is being passed as facts and it is not facts. It may contain a lot of facts but the end conclusion is not conclusive, except that is it inconclusive.
I find it hard to accept theory as an “I know” but rather an “I believe” if it convinces me. I want truth. I believe no one was around to verify Genesis. We have to take Moses’ word that God told him a factual truth. It may be true, but I don’t believe it. It’s just another story to me.
I believe you are a person, as I once was; who just accepts it without question. One does not have to think to do that. They just accept it by faith. A lot of faith situations can be proven, but faith in theory remains to be proven, then it becomes fact. If it can’t be proven, then anyone’s opinion, if not able to be proven is just as valid as anyone else’s.
You can have faith a category four hurricane can hit the east coast and not do any damage, but until it happens, it just a believe or a delusion. You can say there an angel in the room, even if you see it, but if no one else does, it’s just someone saying something that someone else can say didn’t happen. But when others hear it, see it (it doesn’t prove anything yet), to someone who wasn’t there. Record it, video it, repeat it over and over, and then you have something to work with. Today we have had millions of opportunities to do that and what do we have…nothing. I know you beg to differ. But if you believe that God (Jesus) did everything in Genesis, you would easily believe many the so called miracles.
If one challenges these things, they are labeled as unbelievers, and doubters, and troublemakers, and a lot of things that do not set well with the Christian thinking or lack of thinking. I’m not trying to be mean, most of my friends are Christians, I just don’t agree with a lot of it because I’ve had 25 years of it and now I’ve had almost 20 years of thinking and testing. What I have learned is they don’t have the answer anymore than anyone else. I don’t think anyone has the answer yet, but I believe we need to keep researching and testing things to find out what is the ultimately truth, especially a divine truth that has impact on our life after death. I would not want to miss out on that and I won’t because I’m open to all truth, but it has to stand on its own.
I am not out to prove God does not exist, nor am I out to prove he does. I just want to know which one it is, if it is even a choice of one or the other. There are other choices, just as valid.
I am going to stop here for now, because you may choose not to continue this discussion if you have to use Biblical theory to make your points. I welcome them if they make factual points that cannot be proven incorrect using scientific facts, logic, or common sense. In fact you can even say them if they don’t, I just won’t be convinced. I hope I was better on the format.
If you think that I am a person who just accepts things without question then you have read precious little of what I have written.
I ask that you please read the articles on this website. Watch the origin of life video and/or listen to some of the presentations. Most of the questions you raise have been addressed on this website. Absorb some of the material and then we can talk. Thank you for the improved format of your posts.
Perry, I found your treatment of Genesis 1 to be very mistaken and misleading; especially when you wrote that it “matches modern science exactly.” It does not have anything to do with science. Your first assumption that the events are perceived from the surface of the Earth starting with verse 2 is not supported by the text. People did not arrive until the 6th day. The perspective throughout is from a global or universal telling.
Also your second assumption that the days mentioned could be long periods of time does not agree with Exodus 20:11 which enshrines the Sabbath day rest; as the Lord made the heavens and earth in six days and rested on the seventh. The 1st day in Genesis is marked by a period of darkness and one of light and this is referred to as “evening and morning” of the 1st day. This is commonly understood language and is not an allusion to the Big Bang and billions of years.
Your third assumption: that in verse 24 that “living creatures” are livestock and equal to advanced mammals is also incorrect. In verse 25 the writer clarifies he is citing the beast of the earth, cattle, and everything that creeps on the earth (all according to their kind). You are not reading in context.
The source of light on day 1 is not mentioned and this is another error. We know the sun preceded earth and the other planets. The sun and moon are not created until the 4th day but there is no mention of 24 hours. Stars were also created on the 4th day and this is so utterly ridiculous that I do not even have to explain it.
Also Genesis 1:2 certainly does not hint at the arrival of early sea life. This is another error in the account. We know sea life arose firstly but the first mention of life in Genesis is grass, followed by the herb, and then fruit trees on the 3rd day. The fossil record shows trees preceded the appearances of grasses by millions of years.
Also on the fifth day we see that sea life and bird were created. However sea life preceded birds by many millions of years and many thousands of creatures arose and went extinct before winged birds appeared on earth.
In verse 26 God is presented as plural being “Elohim” but it is not cited as any trinity. Also the 7th day is part of the creation week and it ended. “And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done” (Gen. 2:1-2). God is not depicted as still resting and we are not living in the 7th day. Rather the deity blessed the day after he had rested during its duration. It is over and just another day in the seven day creation account.
None of this has anything to do with science. It is a creation myth and nothing more. It also contradictions the creation story in Genesis 2 but that is another story.
You say that I cannot assert that days are periods of time then you tell me that there is no mention of 24 hours. Your reading of what I have written is very superficial (your comments on day 4 betray this) and you seem unaware that theologians have considered most if not all of these interpretations valid for 1200+ years. You don’t seem to have studied the various meanings of the word “day” in Genesis, nor the history of this debate. The Bible doesn’t say the sun and moon were created on day 4, it uses a different word. You would know that if you were reading this carefully. The Bible doesn’t say “sea life” on day 5, it says fish, and fish and birds appear during the same era. You need to do better than skim through this and object to everything you don’t like by misinterpreting what I have said.
Nowhere does it say the 7th day came to an end, the text departs from the usual pattern. This is a significant literary point and it’s one more reason to not accept a 24 hour view. Many writers going back a dozen centuries have pointed out why a 24 hour interpretation doesn’t make sense even within the text itself.
If you prefer to reject the Biblical narrative, then you must insist on a Young Earth interpretation. There are good reasons why people as early as Origen and Justin Martyr (2nd century AD) interpreted it so much differently.
When you adopt an old earth interpretation and assume a terrestrial vantage point, which is established in verse 2 when it says “And the spirit of God hovered over the surface of the deep” the sequence of events is correct.
I recommend that you study the history of this question.
In my book, (NIV) Genesis 1:25 reads like this:
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
God IS depicted as still resting. See Hebrews 4 per my other comment.
Perry,
My point about the 24 hours was in only in response to your funny assertion on the right commentary column on your Genesis 1 treatment, and nothing more. You are the one who initially mentioned it. Our planet has not always had the same period that we measure today.
Also know that the translation from one language to another does not solely depend on one word. Translators must also depend on the context and the term “created” on day 4 is found in many translations. In fact I have never seen it translated “and then the fog was lifted and the sun and moon was firstly seen.” Who are you kidding? We don’t have the autographs and must rely on the work that has been done on the manuscripts in hand. Translators’ labor over them and in many instances there is a committee of experts who go through a process.
Genesis 1 is a mythical account of successive creations over a stated 6/7 days and not about some guy who sits on the earth watching the skies clear of fog, dust and soot while taking notes. Humans do not arrive until the 6th day. We have to assume the only beings alive are gods/angels and your assumption is not supported in the Genesis 1.
In my first post I showed how all of your three assumptions on Genesis 1 are flawed and you did not write a word in defense. The pre-scientific biblical commentators you mentioned were of limited understanding /wishful thinkers and in some cases were self contradictory. Their comments are mainly of historical interest and have no bearing on today’s post-scientific debate.
Genesis is a tale of beginnings and life in the seas of many kind i.e. “an abundance of living creatures” (not only fish) and (unbelievably) with winged birds is only mentioned on the 5th day. The language is explicit and it does not support any ages or stretched time periods. You cannot put both of these creatures and their kinds into the same sentence and claim it is scientific. Who are you kidding?
Genesis 1 speaks often in generalities about life forms and when specific it only speaks to common animals known to humans some thousands of years ago. There isn’t any mention of unknown kinds, like dinosaurs etc. You are fooling yourself and your readership with this nonsense.
Further you have failed to read Exodus 20 as the seven day creation account that is clearly re-cited. These early people did not think in terms of seven ages. Also we are NOT living in the 7th day as god is not still resting. Nor is there a command for humans to keep on resting in like kind. Your analysis is pure nonsense!
This has nothing to do with the early earth theorists but old earth creation/evolution types, like you, are little better. The reality is Genesis 1 is a myth and is divorced from even any quasi-scientific theory. The more science the creationists borrow the more confused they become when applying it to the biblical literature. The two are incompatible. You cannot blend these myths with science and walk away thinking you are credible.
We are still living in the 7th day now. See http://evo2.org/genesis1/comment-page-1/#comment-5114
Even though Genesis 2: 2-3 does not conclude with the “evening and morning” comment it uses other clear terms. It says “and He rested (past tense) on the seventh day from all His work …
It goes on: “Then God blessed (past tense) the seventh day and sanctified (past tense)because in it He rested (past tense) from all His work …”
Once again you are not reading in context. The writer is speaking in the past tense. It means the original seventh day had come and gone. It does not say “and we are still living in the seventh day and God is still resting” or something like that.
You also cited Hebrews 4 on this issue. It is a very controversial book to begin with. Its more polished/higher writing style is very different than other letters/books. In any case the reference to the deity’s resting on the seventh day is also in the past tense, see Heb. 4:4. The “rest” referred comes from the poetic language in Psalms 95. Hebrews uses it as an analogy to the reward that is promised for obedient Christians. This is contrasted to the astrayed and wandering Israelites during their so-called 40 year trial in the wilderness (Psalms 95: 7-11). Again it does not say what you do.
Perry, I think you are promoting a strange and distorted interpretation on this seventh day business. I find it puzzling. Why would you want to say these things when the text is so clear? Also read Exodus 20:11. Is this seventh day business your invention or is this a doctrine in some church you attend? I have never heard of it before.
Also the exodus out of Eqypt and subsequent strange events such as said to have occurred while conquering the promised land did not happen. See http://antspub.com Click on Downloads and chose the free essay: “The Day the Sun and Moon Stood Still.”
Perry, your assertion the statement “the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” in Genesis 1:1 justifies your idea the whole account is from a terrestrial point of view is faulty. This vague statement does not equal to anything like what you suggest. The entire account is from a creator perspective and is given as revelation!
The verse in question continues to say light was created and divided the light from the darkness. This must obviously refer to two separate and in step differing periods of time. It then says God called the light Day and the darkness he called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.
You are trying to have everyone accept the billions of years you insert into the first day were divided only by one period of darkness and another of light. This is nonsense for obvious reasons. The earth has been revolving about an axis (in the early period it no doubt wobbled wildly) and has been orbiting our sun ever since the earth coalesced. The earth’s early revolutionary period was not a 24 hour period. It came about much after the moon initially formed and gravitationally changed the dynamics. This took much time. You cannot go with this 24 hours issue since it was only you mis-inserted it into you faulty theme/interpretation.
Further proof that Genesis is a myth comes from Genesis 1:30. Here the deity says, “to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.
Okay let’s consider this nonsense. It means that only some creatures who live underwater like fish etc. were carnivores. All other creatures (after the creation of humans on the sixth day) were herbivores? Any rational and informed person knows this is not true!
Perry, I think you mean well but your entire argument is misdirected, irrational and has fallen! You are simply trying to force fit science into the mythical Genesis account but these forms are completely incompatible.
A physical point of view is clearly established by this statement:
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
This establishes the creator perspective. The creator is intimately involved with the development of the earth itself.
During the hadean period of the earth’s history the atmosphere was too cloudy for light to reach the surface of the earth.
The word “yom” in Genesis has 5 different meanings, including “era.” It makes no sense to say that animals and plants reproduced after their kind in only 24 hours. Commentators have been writing about this for 3000 years. People who want to reject the Bible revert to the YEC dogma which is a recent reaction to scientism. In the history of theology, YEC dogmatism is a late 20th century phenomenon, not a broad teaching over the last 2000 years. I have quotes by Jewish rabbis from 800 years ago estimating the age of the earth to be 15 billion years.
Where does Genesis 1:30 say that there was no carnivorous animals?
Well yes … physical tihngs i.e. earth, waters are mentioned but the point of view is from that of the diety/creator throughout. You agree here but earlier wanted to insert a human point of view by suggesting as the clouds/gases etc. were lifted and behold the sun and moon appeared. The account is literally a creation account and yes it says then god MADE two great lights (Gen. 1:14-18).
One Hebrew word/term does not make the translation. It is the context that determines its meaning. The entire account is about a creation event/miracle.
Genesis 1: 11-12 is about a miracle of creating plants after their kind. The diety created many of each. It does not have anything to do with them reproducing by natural means on the same day. Ditto for the animals.
The YEC dogma is nonsense just as most of the thoughts of the earlier biblical commentators are. The pre-scientific comments are all over the map so it’s easy to cherry pick one that agrees with your argument.
Also … I again suggest that you read Exodus 20:8-11. It reiterates their view of a 6 day creation and the diety rested on the 7th day. The original seventh day ended. The Israelites were commanded to rest on the weekly Sabbath as a remembrance (Exodus 20:8). The idea that we are still in the seventh day is nonsense.
Gen. 1:30 goes to “EVERY beast of the field” “EVERY bird” and “EVERYTHING that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given EVERY green herb for food; and it was so.
Perry what is it about that that you do not get? You are clearly in denial … Genesis 1 is a creation myth and you are trying to force fit it into the modern scientific model. It’s like the glass slipper … it did not fit on Cinderella’s sister’s feet.
You are much brighter than the nonsense you have written about Genesis 1.
Hi Perry,
There’s a 4th way; the one that could somewhat reconcile the Young Earth and the Old Earth views, even though it is totally different from both. And potentially, it could also cause science to make a deeper thought about what’s actually written in Genesis…
If we follow YEC view that we should interpret Genesis literally, so Day does really mean a “day”, but then also take a view that this Day is not 24-hour day, but is God’s working Day (much longer in length), we might reconcile these two viewpoints, right? If so, the question then is: “how long is God’s Day?”
Genesis 2:4 (KJV) gives us a hint: “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created…” Notice the word “generations” (of the heavens and of the earth). As children are the second generation of “people” compared to their parents and grandchildren are the third, so each earth (and heaven) that appeared on the specific creation day is a new and improved version of the original heaven and earth mentioned in Genesis 1:1.
Applied in the context of the seven creation days, “generations” indicates that Day is not only much larger than 24 hours, but also suggests it to be a part of a complete creation cycle. In a creation cycle God creates all things (i.e. creation) with a Big Bang in the morning, they exist during a Day and then are destroyed (perhaps with a Big Crunch?) in the evening. During a Night the creation does not exist, except as a seed idea in God’s Mind. On the morning of the next Day a new Big Bang indicates the birth of a new incarnation (generation) of creation, and all of its portions.
God needed six creation cycles to finalize the design of this hobby of His:”For thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created” (Revelation 4:11, KJV). At first, the earth we live on was just a blueprint (an idea) in His Mind (i.e. it was “without form and void”) and now it’s fully materialized, whirling through space, teaming with life and a suitable place for a man that is able to marvel at God’s handiwork.
(a more lengthy article could be found at: http://holyscience.wordpress.com/did-god-create-everything-in-6-days/)
God Bless,
Nito