Did God create the earth formless?

[tonychanyt]

NASB20, Gen 1:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 And the earth was a formless [H8414] and desolate emptiness, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters.

But then, Legacy Standard Bible, Isa 45:

18 For this is what the LORD says, [He] who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it [and] did not create it formless [H8414], [but] formed it to be inhabited): "I am the LORD, and there is no one else.

Did God create the earth H8414-formless?

In Genesis 1:2, the earth was created initially as a dark earth. On Day 3, God continued his creation:

9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

At this point, the earth changed. It was no longer formless.

Isa 45:18 refers to Day 3 and afterward:

He established it and did not create it formless, but formed it to be inhabited.

Isaiah mentioned not-formless in connection with the earth being inhabited.

LXX realized these two confusing usages of H8414. In Genesis 1:2, they translated H8141 as G517-unseen; In Isaish, as G2756-empty. So there is no contradiction in LXX concerning these two passages.

The apparent contradiction in Hebrew can be resolved by pointing to the different time frames.

In the Greek LXX, there is no apparent contradiction.

 

[Diamond72]

Did God create the earth H8414-formless?

God created the world for man "To Do".

The idea that God left the world for humans to take care of is often interpreted as a call to stewardship and responsibility. It suggests that while God created the world, humans are given the duty to care for it, make decisions, and cultivate it responsibly. It speaks to the role humans play in shaping their environment, making ethical choices, and fostering community. This belief can be found in various religious teachings and philosophies, emphasizing the balance between divine providence and human agency.

 

[Job 33:6]

God created the formless Earth in 6 days, the same way we might create formless and empty cookies by using a cookie cutter, and adding chocolate chips, perhaps within 6 hours or 6 minutes depending on how fast you can make cookies.

God created it to be inhabited in the same way that we create cookies to be filled with chocolate chips.

 

[Diamond72]

God created it to be inhabited in the same way that we create cookies to be filled with chocolate chips.

The wheat for the cookie and the coco for the chocolate come from totally different places. So we did not have chocolate chip cookies until the late 1800's.

 

[Platte]

NASB20, Gen 1:


But then, Legacy Standard Bible, Isa 45:


Did God create the earth H8414-formless?

In Genesis 1:2, the earth was created initially as a dark earth. On Day 3, God continued his creation:


At this point, the earth changed. It was no longer formless.

Isa 45:18 refers to Day 3 and afterward:


Isaiah mentioned not-formless in connection with the earth being inhabited.

LXX realized these two confusing usages of H8414. In Genesis 1:2, they translated H8141 as G517-unseen; In Isaish, as G2756-empty. So there is no contradiction in LXX concerning these two passages.

The apparent contradiction in Hebrew can be resolved by pointing to the different time frames.

In the Greek LXX, there is no apparent contradiction.

The earth was created without form (no topography) and void. It was empty. God added topography as you noted; to make the dry land appear. He later of course added plants, animals, etc to fill the earth.

 

[Diamond72]

The earth was created without form (no topography) and void. It was empty. God added topography as you noted; to make the dry land appear. He later of course added plants, animals, etc to fill the earth.

Early Earth:​

• Solar Nebula: Scientists believe that the Earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago from a cloud of gas and dust in a process called accretion. This early stage can be considered "formless," as the materials that would become Earth were not yet a solid body.
• Hadean Eon: The earliest eon of Earth's history, known as the Hadean, was characterized by a molten surface, intense volcanic activity, and frequent asteroid impacts. The Earth was still forming and did not have a solid crust, oceans, or atmosphere as we know them today—this chaotic and inhospitable state could be described as "empty" in terms of life and stable landforms.

 

[Platte]

Early Earth:​

• Solar Nebula: Scientists believe that the Earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago from a cloud of gas and dust in a process called accretion. This early stage can be considered "formless," as the materials that would become Earth were not yet a solid body.
• Hadean Eon: The earliest eon of Earth's history, known as the Hadean, was characterized by a molten surface, intense volcanic activity, and frequent asteroid impacts. The Earth was still forming and did not have a solid crust, oceans, or atmosphere as we know them today—this chaotic and inhospitable state could be described as "empty" in terms of life and stable landforms.

Do either of these theories you support describe how the Spirit of God moved upon the "face" of the water while the earth was without form and void?

 

[Diamond72]

how the Spirit of God moved upon the "face" of the water while the earth was without form and void?

The Hebrew word used here, "ruach," can mean breath, wind, or spirit, and the verb "moved" is sometimes translated as "hovered" or "brooded," suggesting a gentle, nurturing presence, similar to a bird hovering over its nest.

Science tells us that because of the heat water would be a vapor. As the earth cooled water became a solid. The earliest water on Earth likely started as vapor, then condensed into liquid as the planet cooled, and eventually formed ice in colder regions. This transition from gas to liquid to solid reflects the dynamic changes in Earth's early environment.

 

[Platte]

The Hebrew word used here, "ruach," can mean breath, wind, or spirit, and the verb "moved" is sometimes translated as "hovered" or "brooded," suggesting a gentle, nurturing presence, similar to a bird hovering over its nest.

Science tells us that because of the heat water would be a vapor. As the earth cooled water became a solid. The earliest water on Earth likely started as vapor, then condensed into liquid as the planet cooled, and eventually formed ice in colder regions. This transition from gas to liquid to solid reflects the dynamic changes in Earth's early environment.

You do realize that science is based on certain assumptions - one being that God did not create the universe and the earth 6000 years ago or in 6 days.

 

[tonychanyt]

You do realize that science is based on certain assumptions - one being that God did not create the universe and the earth 6000 years ago or in 6 days.

Reference?

 

[Diamond72]

You do realize that science is based on certain assumptions

There is a lot of science fiction in science and a lot of science in science fiction.

Imagination is a crucial component of scientific discovery and innovation. Scientists often use their imaginations to:

Formulate Hypotheses:​

• Creative Thinking: Scientists imagine possible explanations for natural phenomena and then test these hypotheses through experiments and observations.

Design Experiments:​

• Innovative Approaches: Designing experiments often requires creative problem-solving and the ability to imagine new ways to investigate questions.

Theorize and Model:​

• Conceptual Models: Scientists use imagination to develop theories and models that explain complex systems, such as the behavior of particles in quantum mechanics or the structure of the universe.

Problem Solving:​

• Thinking Outside the Box: Imagination helps scientists devise solutions to problems, whether it's finding new medical treatments or developing sustainable technologies.

Speculate About the Unknown:​

• Exploration: When exploring unknown territories, such as deep space or the deep ocean, scientists use their imagination to speculate about what they might find and how to search for it.

 

[Platte]

There is a lot of science fiction in science and a lot of science in science fiction.

Imagination is a crucial component of scientific discovery and innovation. Scientists often use their imaginations to:

Formulate Hypotheses:​

• Creative Thinking: Scientists imagine possible explanations for natural phenomena and then test these hypotheses through experiments and observations.

Design Experiments:​

• Innovative Approaches: Designing experiments often requires creative problem-solving and the ability to imagine new ways to investigate questions.

Theorize and Model:​

• Conceptual Models: Scientists use imagination to develop theories and models that explain complex systems, such as the behavior of particles in quantum mechanics or the structure of the universe.

Problem Solving:​

• Thinking Outside the Box: Imagination helps scientists devise solutions to problems, whether it's finding new medical treatments or developing sustainable technologies.

Speculate About the Unknown:​

• Exploration: When exploring unknown territories, such as deep space or the deep ocean, scientists use their imagination to speculate about what they might find and how to search for it.

Understood...but YOU know things that science does not know. You know FACTS that science does not know. Yet you adhere to the assumptions that science makes....assumptions that science would never make if it knew the FACTS that you know.

 

[Diamond72]

Understood...but YOU know things that science does not know. You know FACTS that science does not know. Yet you adhere to the assumptions that science makes....assumptions that science would never make if it knew the FACTS that you know.

Correct and what stands out was a conversation I had with an atheist who claimed to have a PhD in DNA. I know what the Bible says about Israel and they tried to argue that the DNA did not support what the Bible tells us. But what they fail to understand is that God's perspective is from the beginning looking forward. Our perspective is from the end looking back to the beginning.

From my studies Science always agrees with the Bible. Some of the best evidence we have that the Bible is true is Evolution. This is why Time magazine talks about the Bible Adam and Eve. But also Science has their Adam and Eve. The term "Eden" has come to be associated with diverse and thriving ecosystems. This metaphor likely draws from the biblical depiction of the Garden of Eden, which is often imagined as a lush, idyllic paradise teeming with life.

Science uses the word Geneology. The Bible uses the word Generations. We see in Revelation that at the end of the age God has kept 144,000 pure. Science can show this with the Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH), which is a specific genetic signature found in many men who identify as Kohanim, the Jewish priestly caste.

It does get difficult to study Haplotypes but they do prove that the Bible is true.

 

[Platte]

Platte said:
You do realize that science is based on certain assumptions - one being that God did not create the universe and the earth 6000 years ago or in 6 days.

Reference?

Science 101.

The process of building scientific knowledge relies on a few basic assumptions that are worth acknowledging. Science operates on the assumptions that: There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us. (Science makes the assumption that God did not create the universe or the earth - rather it was a natural cause).

Basic assumptions of science - Understanding Science

 

[Diamond72]

Basic assumptions of science - Understanding Science

Berkeley has a long-standing reputation for being a hotbed of political activism and progressive movements. This can sometimes include more radical or fringe elements.

The problem here is the basic assumption that: There is consistency in the causes that operate in the natural world. This violates Darwins theory of random mutations that are anything but consistent.

They say that evolution favors traits that enhance survival and reproduction, leading to the gradual adaptation of species to their environments. This does not add up to a hill of beans because changes in the environment causes mass extinction. If evolution were valid then the species should be able to adapt to the changes.

The whole assumption thing has more holes in it than swiss cheese. You can not say something is true just because you assume it to be true. Perhaps the only assumption we can make is that making assumptions can lead to disaster.

Evo-Devo, or Evolutionary Developmental Biology does deal with this consistency.

 

[Platte]

Berkeley has a long-standing reputation for being a hotbed of political activism and progressive movements. This can sometimes include more radical or fringe elements.

The problem here is the basic assumption that: There is consistency in the causes that operate in the natural world. This violates Darwins theory of random mutations that are anything but consistent.

They say that evolution favors traits that enhance survival and reproduction, leading to the gradual adaptation of species to their environments. This does not add up to a hill of beans because changes in the environment causes mass extinction. If evolution were valid then the species should be able to adapt to the changes.

The whole assumption thing has more holes in it than swiss cheese. You can not say something is true just because you assume it to be true. Perhaps the only assumption we can make is that making assumptions can lead to disaster.

Evo-Devo, or Evolutionary Developmental Biology does deal with this consistency.

The assumption that There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us - is a standard assumption that all sciences I’ve studied employ.

Every scientific claim (including evolution) is based on this assumption as well as always many other assumptions.

If science knew the things that you know and the facts that you know most of the assumptions made would be significantly different.

 

[tonychanyt]

Science 101.

Then, it should be easy for you actually find a reference. This is the 2nd time I have asked you to do such an easy thing.

 

[Platte]

From my studies Science always agrees with the Bible.

Science agrees that God created the universe and the earth? That He made man in his image? That he sent his son Jesus from Heaven to pay the price of sin for man by dying on the cross? That if you accept Salavation through Jesus Christ you will be resurrected after you die and live eternally with God?

 

[Platte]

Then, it should be easy for you actually find a reference. This is the 2nd time I have asked you to do such an easy thing.

I just sent you a link.
The most basic assumption of science is:
There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us

 

[tonychanyt]

I just sent you a link.

Where is the link? This is the 3rd and the last time I have asked this question.