Genesis 1
1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
a.. To what "heaven" is this referring? It could be referring to our
atmosphere, but if the Earth was "without form," it wouldn't be able to
hold
an atmosphere gravitationally. But of course, "heaven" might also refer to
the empty space that fills up the rest of the universe outside of our
planet. But if that is the case, then where did God exist before He
"created" space itself? For that matter, where does God exist
now?Possible
Response:
God exists "outside" of normal space. God exists in the "spiritual
realm." God exists "outside of creation."
Ultil someone defines the meaning of "outside creation" or "spiritual
realm," this kind of response is vacuous and is simply an appeal to
emotion
(namely grandioseness and awe).
b.. The "beginning" of what? What did God do before the beginning? Who
created God?Possible Response:
Cosmological Argument: Everything in the world requires a cause. By
induction into the past, there must exist a "first cause" that initiated
all
future events. This first cause is God.
Several objections can be made against this argument. Perhaps the
strongest is that the universe does not necessarily require a creator. The
universe may be "just there, and that's all," as spoken by Bertrand
Russell,
and may have always existed into the infinite past. The Big Bang theory
suggests that our "local" ****tion of spacetime (the observable universe)
had
a "beginning" of sorts, but this in no way rules out the possibility of
events occurring "before" the Big Bang, or other universes existing
independently of ours.
In addition, who is to say that our perception of causality necessarily
applies on a universal scale? Causality may very well be a completely
subjective phenomenon, and need not apply to the universe itself.
c.. Why doesn't the author provide the most rudimentary explanation of
how
God creates anything? Simply saying that God created something is
essentially meaningless. It's like asking someone how a microwave oven
works, and receiving the answer, "It's magic." The Bible makes no mention
of the actual physical processes that take place when God does his
creating.
d.. Why does God need to create anything? By definition, a maximally
perfect being must be eternally "complete." That is, if God sees that
something is missing and needs to create it, then it implies that this god
is not perfect to begin with.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the
face
of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
a.. If the earth was "without form" and "void," did it really exist yet?
If it has been created, then it must have some kind of form by definition,
or even God would not be able to distinguish it from space (which is truly
void).
b.. The "face of the waters" clearly suggests that the earth had a
definite "form," which contradicts the first sentence of the verse. Did
God
create these waters, or did they exist all along?
c.. The concept of "darkness" cannot be understood without prior
knowledge
of "light," which has not been created yet. If God didn't know what
"light'
looks like, then how could he know that it was "darkness" in which he was
floating?
d.. What is the difference between "God" and "the Spirit of God"?
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
a.. For light to exist, there needs to be a light source. The light
source
in our solar system is the Sun, but the Sun has not been created yet. From
where was this "light" emanating?Possible Response:
God is all-powerful. Surely he can create light without a light
source.
It can emanate from empty space, if he so wills it.
OK, God may be all-powerful, but, overlooking the fallacious appeal to
authority in this argument, why would God go out of his way to create
things
in an order that is completely contrary to common sense?
b.. To whom is God speaking? If he is doing all the creating, why does
he
need to "say" anything? The act of speaking involves using one's vocal
cords
to cause vibrations in the surrounding air. What did God speak with? What
was the medium in which God was able to speak?
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light
from
the darkness.
a.. This suggests that there was a chance that the light may have been
"bad" instead of "good." But how could a perfect being create anything
bad?
This could also suggest that God wasn't sure if light was going to be good
or bad. But then would this not question God's omniscience?
b.. Why does he need to "divide" light from darkness? If light was
"created," then doesn't this automatically define light as separate from
darkness?
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And
the
evening and the morning were the first day.
a.. Why does he need to assign them names if he doesn't have anybody to
tell about it?
b.. "Morning" and "evening" are defined by the apparent rising and
setting
of our Sun, respectively. However, the Sun does not exist yet. So what is
the definition of "morning" and "evening" in this case?
c.. This is the first reference to God as "he." Why does God need
gender?
If it absolutely must have gender, why is it male? How can God know about
gender before he created animals that have gender and realized it was
"good"?
1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and
let it divide the waters from the waters.
1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under
the
firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
a.. Our Space Program has proven beyond any doubt that no "firmament"
exists, and that there is no second reservoir of water above the sky.
Therefore, either this verse is untrue, or this "firmament" has somehow
disappeared a long time ago. And if it disappeared, then why did God
create
it?
b.. The idea of a firmament that holds up a layer of water could
presumably be used to explain rain (the firmament opens up and lets rain
water through). However, today (in the 21st century) we know that water
can
eva****ate, form into clouds, and then come back down as rain droplets. We
can conclude that, either the human author of this verse did not yet have
knowledge of eva****ation, or God simply did not understand how his own
planet worked.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning
were the second day.
a.. Didn't God already create a "heaven" in Verse 1? What's the
difference
between the two?
b.. Once again, for this verse to make sense, the firmament would have
to
exist, but it doesn't.
c.. And again, the Sun does not exist yet to account for "evening" and
"morning."
1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together
unto
one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
a.. This implies that there is a single continent and a single ocean on
the planet, and yet we know that there are multiple continents and
multiple
bodies of water.
1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the
waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
a.. Again the author mentions that God saw that his creation was "good."
Was there ever a chance that it could have been "bad"? If not, then why
does
he need to "check" that it's good?
1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding
seed,
and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself,
upon the earth: and it was so.
a.. What does it mean exactly for the earth to "bring forth" grass? What
did God do to induce the earth to spontaneously sprout off millions of
species of plants simultaneously? Not only that, but "the earth" had to
carefully select where to "bring forth" which plants, since certain plants
can only grow in certain climates. Speaking of climates, we would surely
need the Sun to regulate the climates on our planet. Sadly, the Sun still
does not exist at this point.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his
kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his
kind:
and God saw that it was good.
a.. Plants produce their energy through photosynthesis, where the plant
converts water, carbon dioxide, and other chemicals into carbohydrates.
But
this chemical reaction could not take place without one thing: sunlight.
Unfortunately for these plants, the Sun does not exist yet. It would be
quite impossible for any plant to grow, much less "yield seed," without
any
sunlight.
b.. And, of course, let's not forget that some plants are carnivorous,
like the Venus Flytrap (Dionaea muscipula). Why would God design a plant
for
"eating" organisms that don't exist yet?
1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
a.. Once again, the Sun does not exist yet to account for "evening" and
"morning."
1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to
divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons,
and for days, and years:
a.. Well, finally we have some clue as to the meaning of "evening" and
"morning." (the verse even says so itself: "and for days"). So then what
was
the author thinking when he/she spoke of "days" in earlier verses?
b.. Didn't God already "divide the day from the night" himself? (verse
4)
c.. "Signs"? Does God believe in astrology?
1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give
light
upon the earth: and it was so.
a.. This verse makes it sound as if the stars were created with the sole
purpose of giving light to the earth. In reality, the light that ****nes on
the earth from any star in the sky is about a billionth of a percent of
the
star's total output. It seems that all this extra light is going to waste.
b.. There are millions of galaxies that are so far away that they can
only
be seen with the most powerful telescopes. There are also entire galaxies
that only emit light in the infrared or even radio regions of the
spectrum.
Why were all these super-massive objects "created" if they serve no
practical purpose as far as the Earth is concerned?
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and
the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
a.. The Sun is hardly a "great" star. It is, at best, of average size
and
brightness. An example of a "great" star would be the Pistol Star, which
is
100 times more massive than the Sun, and 10 million times as bright.
b.. The moon is by no means a "light." It is a satellite of the Earth
that
reflects light from the Sun.
c.. The Moon does not "rule" the night. It is visible during the day and
night an equal amount of time. It would be more accurate to say that the
Sun
"rules" the night, because it is actually sunlight that is reflected by
the
Moon.
d.. Didn't God create the stars in verse 14?
1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon
the
earth,
a.. Once again, for this verse to make sense, the firmament would have
to
exist, but it doesn't.
b.. This suggests that stars are really small "dots" that hang somewhere
above the ground. We actually know that stars are celestial bodies that
are
millions of times larger than the Earth, and extremely far away.
c.. These verses also suggest that the Sun is somehow different from
"the
stars" (since it was created separately), when in fact the Sun is just
like
any other star, except it is very close to us, which is why we are in
orbit
around it.
d.. God apparently also created several extra planets in our solar
system
that are completely uninhabitable, and thus totally useless. He also
created
thousands of asteroids of various sizes, many of which may pose a serious
threat to our survival in the future.
e.. We have also begun to discover numerous planets in orbit around
other
stars. What possible use could those serve to God's earthly creation?
1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light
from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
a.. Didn't God "divide the light from the darkness" himself? (verse 4)
1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving
creature
that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open
firmament
of heaven.
a.. This is unclear: did God "create" the living creatures, or did he
just
cause "the waters" to "bring forth" the creatures? In other words, did God
create the creatures, or did water? By what process did water "bring
forth"
the creatures? Surely not evolution?
b.. We can see very easily that "moving creatures" contain many other
chemicals besides water. How can that be, if they were created out of
water?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the earth "brought forth" living
creatures?
1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth,
which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every
winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the
waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
a.. Why does God need to "bless" anything if everything he creates
should
be perfect by definition?
b.. What exactly is the meaning of "blessed"? Is God making something
more
"perfect" than it already is? Is God "blessing" things so that he would
"remember" which things are better than others?
1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his
kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind:
and
it was so.
1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after
their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind:
and
God saw that it was good.
a.. When were insects created? I suppose we can consider some insects as
things that "creepeth upon the earth." But what about flying insects?
Surely
those are not "fowls"? And when did God ever create bacteria and viruses?
b.. Let's also not forget that all animals are actually composed of
smaller organisms called cells which, in principle, can survive on their
own
outside the body. Why is there no mention of this here?
1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and
let
them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing
that creepeth upon the earth.
a.. Exactly how many is "us," and what does "us" refer to? Many believe
that "us" refers to the Trinity (in fact, some versions of the Bible
actually specify "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" next to "us"). Those who
sup****t this idea have to make up excuses for why God is sometimes one,
and
sometimes many, and resort to using embarrassing terms like "Godhead." So
what about religions that don't acknowledge the Trinity, like Judaism? How
do they explain "us"?
b.. Apparently, not all the animals realize that "man" has been granted
dominion over them. For example, if we drop a person into a swamp with a
dozen alligators, the alligators are likely to blatantly refuse the
person's
dominion over them.
c.. The only way that humans gain dominion over other animals is by
constantly outsmarting them. For a good example, visit your local
slaughterhouse.
1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
him; male and female created he them.
a.. "In his own image" - meaning what? Does it mean physical attributes,
like arms, legs, eyes, genitals, rectum, etc.? If so, then what does God
need with all those things? He doesn't need a rectum because he doesn't
eat;
he doesn't need arms or legs because he is "invisible" and never interacts
with our world; he doesn't need eyes because he already knows everything
that will ever happen, and therefore would have no reason to "see" it; and
he certainly doesn't need genitals because he doesn't reproduce (except
that
one time, but we'll get to that later!).
b.. If "in his image" really refers to physical attributes, then we
might
as well say that all animals were created "in his image," because our
anatomy is strikingly similar to other animals, and it's virtually
indistinguishable from mammalian anatomy. More advanced animals like
chimpanzees can even produce facial expressions similar to our own.
c.. Moreover, let's not forget that all animal embryos look absolutely
identical, no matter what type of animal it is - bird, reptile, amphibian,
or mammal, including human. These embryos, even human ones, have
evolutionary echoes like gill slits and a long tail. What sense did it
make
for God to tack these things on to the embryo if they will never be used?
d.. But suppose that "in his image" means that our consciousness (or
"soul," if you prefer) is like the consciousness of God. Still, it can be
easily argued that every aspect of our consciousness is shaped by our
interaction with our environment. First of all, consciousness would not
exist without a body. It is only because of the complex organization of
our
brain cells that consciousness is possible. Secondly, all of our thought
patterns are based on our observations of real-world objects and
phenomena.
Without all of these stimuli, consciousness (if it would exist) would have
a
completely different shape, a completely different image. How could God's
consciousness be like ours before he even created the world that would
later
shape our consciousness?
e.. Consider this: the "consciousness" of an adult chimpanzee, or even a
parrot, is much more sophisticated than that of a human infant. Does that
mean that these animals are more "in his image" than human babies?
f.. Any way we look at it, it would not be possible for God to "look"
anything like us (physically or otherwise), because our body and our
consciousness are so intimately linked with the world which we inhabit.
How
could God have resembled our "image" before he created the environment
that
made our image possible?
g.. Notice that this particular creation story suggests that God created
multiple humans (not necessarily two), and allowed them to multiply. No
mention of Adam, Eve, or anybody else from other Biblical stories.
(Compare
this to Chapter 2)
1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and
multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over
the
fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing
that moveth upon the earth.
a.. Again, if we place a human being into the heart of a jungle, the
other
animals will probably have a different opinion of who has "dominion" over
who.
b.. The command "be fruitful and multiply" might work for
non-intelligent
animals that develop a natural equilibrium with their environment. But
it's
a pretty bad idea for humans, which, like parasites, consume all natural
resources and still continue to multiply. Today, overpopulation is a very
serious problem in many countries, where infants and toddlers die every
day
by the thousands, despite the Christian Children's Fund. And we've only
started thinking about conserving natural resources just a few decades
ago.
1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which
is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the
fruit
of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
a.. Every herb and every tree? What about things like hemlock,
baneberries, oleander, and so many other poisonous plants? Thanks a lot!
There are also many poisonous mushrooms, like the Death Cap (Amanita
phalloides), although God apparently never took the time to actually
create
mushrooms.
1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to
every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have
given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
a.. If all the animals were originally herbivorous, then why give the
lion
such huge teeth? Or the bear such huge claws? Or the s**** such deadly
venom? Just imagine it: lions, sheep, and tyrannosauri prancing merrily
together in an open field, chewing on flowers.
b.. What about life forms that are parasites by nature, like tapeworms,
mosquitoes, and flesh-eating bacteria? What did they survive on?
c.. The only reason that cows can survive on an all-plant diet is
because
they have a four-chambered stomach that can gradually extract what little
nutrients plants contain. Animals like lions and bears would never survive
on plants, because their single-chambered stomach is expressly intended
for
digesting meat. If they only ate plants, they would die very shortly while
having long and painful bouts of diarrhea. As an experiment, try eating
nothing but lettuce for a month. You'll be simulating the conditions of
"heaven," but you'll be in too much pain to realize it.
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
a.. Let's clarify something: have the humans already multiplied and
filled
the earth? (Verse 28) If so, then what is the rest of the Bible talking
about? As far as we know, this is now a complete creation story, and not a
bad one at that. Is there a need to go any further? Six days of
"creation,"
and the world is complete, and here we are. If only the author(s) would
have
just left it at that. But, alas, it goes on.
Final Thoughts on Chapter 1
If I lived 3000 years ago, had the same knowledge of how the world works
as
the greatest minds of the time, and had the desire to write a creation
story, this would probably be it. So what is the big deal? Why is this
creation story considered sacred in any way? This story simply embodies
the
sum of human knowledge at the time of its conception, and the conclusions
at
which the authors arrived based on their knowledge.
Believing that the Earth is the center of the universe (indeed, that the
Earth is the universe), or that the sky is enveloped by a solid canopy
(from
which stars are suspended) is perfectly excusable for an ancient culture
thousands of years ago. However, it is absurd to continue to hold such
beliefs in our modern age.
from http://dmitrybrant.com/nitpicking-genesis/genesis-1
--
"Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - ignorance is."
Visit No Answers in Genesis! http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/
--
MY BLOG - MARK T - my thoughts on Christianity & links
http://www.blognow.com.au/strooth/
MY SOUNDCLICK PAGE- download my original songs in mp3 format
http://www.soundclick.com/marktindall
FUNDY FUNHOUSE -
http://fundamentalistfunhouse.blogspot.com/
- a resource on the current Fundamentalist Dark Age and Christian
fundamentalism.
PASTOR DALE K WHANGKE
http://dalekwhangke.blogspot.com/
Wyrst Pentacostal Church
|
