Ben Cartwright October 14, 2001
Well, on our message board, the Bible is often touted as the end-all book, even in the area of science. Many references are made to Genesis in particular, and to the idea that it is such an amazing, ahead-of-its-time book, and that it could only have been written by God himself. In light of this, I would like to conduct what in my Christian days we would have called a �Bible Study� on Genesis chapter one. We�ll just take a look and see how much sense it makes nowadays. I have chosen to use the King James Version of the Bible, since many young-earthers are also �King James Only� supporters.
Genesis 1
1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Okay, so the first thing to notice here is that �in the beginning�, or most likely, before anything else was created, God created the heaven and the earth. This is the first problem we encounter with the passage. The prevailing belief of the time was that there was earth, and then there was �heaven�, which basically referred to something which was just above the earth. Anyone who now tells you that this passage somehow referred to stars the way we now understand them is kidding himself. When they said �heaven�, they meant the little canopy around the earth which (some believed) included little holes through which God�s glory shone. They had zero understanding of what those little points of light really were, and I don�t blame them. It is unreasonable to expect people who lived then to understand that. But, of course, the problem here is that if God wrote this, then one would definitely expect him to understand it. Let�s move on.
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.
Okay, fine. The earth didn�t have any form to it at this point. There was lots of water, and God�s spirit was moving around for whatever reason.
3
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
So at this point, there was light, but neither the Sun nor the moon had been created yet. Where was this light coming from? If it was coming from God, it should have been there before this point. If it wasn�t coming from God, where was it coming from, and where is it now? It sounds very nice in a �creation myth� sort of way, but it doesn�t make much sense.
4
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Okay, at this point, I�m really confused. God divided the light from the darkness? How does one do that? Let�s read on.
5
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Ah, I see� he separated the light from the darkness means we are treating �light� and �darkness� as separate entities. God lets the �light� be there during the day, and the �darkness� be there during the night. We all know that darkness does not exist as an entity� it is simply the absence of light. This reads about like any other creation myth of the time, yet we are to view this as God�s holy word, perfect and full of knowledge that man did not possess? If I had lived 6,000 years ago (or so), I would have probably come up with something pretty similar to this.
6
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
So apparently the people of this time thought there was water on the earth (such as lakes, oceans, etc.) and water up in the sky, all divided by this �firmament�. It isn�t very hard to see why they would imagine this� they saw water fall from the sky periodically! So it�s no surprise at all that people would think there was a bunch of water up there. They had no understanding of even the simplest concepts such as evaporation, and their writing here reflects that lack of knowledge. Yet again, we are told that this book contains great scientific knowledge.
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.
Basically, it seems that the �firmament� is some sort of blanket that holds the water away, and also probably contains the holes that allow for seeing bits of God�s glory (we now call these holes �stars�, since they are not holes at all).
8
And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
So we see that this �firmament� is now called �Heaven�. Is it just me, or didn�t God create this above in the first verse? Maybe that first verse was just summing up a more specific process that was to come. I�m trying to give the Bible the benefit of the doubt here. If these are two different �heavens�, we have no indicators of which is which, or what the difference is in the two. Since they are named the same thing, we will treat them as the same thing.
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.
So up to this point, there was no dry land sticking out. There was enough water to cover the entire earth. Now, this is simple eighth grade science� say you have an aquarium, and you have gravel in it, but you have enough water that you are covering all the gravel. If you �gather together� the water in one place, as this verse indicates, what happens? Obviously, the water is going to be higher than the land, only over to one side. In other words, you can�t just �gather water together� in the way this passage says. If the passage said that God somehow made the land push up higher and come out of the water, that would make more sense. But the idea that God just sort of shoved the water over and let the land show again reflects the utter lack of scientific knowledge of the time. Something would have had to be done to the rest of the water� perhaps God could have thought it out of existence. Or he could have sent it to the Sun. But he couldn�t just �gather it together�, which is what it says he did. Water doesn�t work that way.
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.
Again, obvious creation myth material. This is how people thought back then, but it is completely unimpressive now. I enjoy it as a way to relate to ancient thinking, but when someone tells me this is scientifically accurate, I am forced to disagree.
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.
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.
13
And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Okay, fine. Some plants start growing.
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:
Up until now, the �firmament� (which, you will recall, is some mysterious blanket that holds up the water that is obviously in the sky because we see water fall from the sky) has had no lights in it. But now, these lights are introduced. So basically, the belief was that these lights were between us and the water, rather than being far, far away from the earth. If God really wrote this book, it would have been impressive for him to explain that these were actually very distant objects, even farther away than the Sun. But the ancient mind would assume that because they were much smaller and less bright than the Sun, they must be closer. And so we see that thinking represented here, rather than some amazing scientific knowledge.
15
And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
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.
Okay, so finally we get to see the Sun and the moon. One is forced to wonder in what way we were calling things �evening and morning� up to this point. What is a �morning� if the Sun does not exist? And what is an �evening�? More creation mythology. What I don�t get is that �he made the stars also�. Let�s read on for clarification.
Before we do, though, let me point out one of the most glaring errors in this chapter... the moon is not a "light". It's as simple as that. If God was involved at all in the writing of this, surely he could have let them know that the moon only reflects the light of the Sun. Again, it's easy to see why someone without scientific knowledge would think that the moon is a light, but it isn't. The Bible clearly says that the Sun and moon are both "lights", and they aren't. Why should we even look any farther before deciding that the Bible is far from "inerrant"?
17
And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
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.
See, this is just strange. God made stars and set them in the firmament (which means they are still between us and the water), but I thought he already put lights in the firmament in verse 14. Perhaps, again, verse 14 was just a summary verse of what was to be listed more specifically below. We�ll take it that way. In any event, God putting stars in the firmament is categorically incorrect since the stars, of course, are far out in space, and not between us and our source of rain (which is not a big bunch of liquid water, which the Bible also asserts).
19
And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Yes, the �fourth day�, but only one of these days has actually involved the Sun, so I have no idea how they were measuring �day� and �night� before this. The Bible could have clarified, but it didn�t.
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.
Well, what I�m reading here is that all these creatures came up out of the water, including birds. This is stuff you don�t hear much about when you�re discussing things with creationists. Maybe they think if they just tell us what the Bible says, we will never go read it for ourselves. And, of course, what they tell us is not the reality. When you really sit down and read it, it�s easy to see it for what it is. I think in any discussion with a creationist who asserts that the Bible is perfect�even scientifically�a good thing to do is to go and get an actual Bible and use it. I mean, come on� animals coming from the water... in one day?
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.
This �after their kind� gets a lot of play in creation/evolution debates, but it�s hard to ever get a creationist to really define �kind�. I�m not going to spend much time on it here, but I will say that the �kinds� of animals we see are categorized by our human minds, and could be categorized other ways. Creationists seem to think taxonomists are going by some obvious system, but taxonomy is often very difficult, because of the way that organisms are interrelated.
22
And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
Okay, so I guess even though it said �every creature that moves�, it only meant aquatic animals and birds. Why birds came from the water, I really don�t know.
23
And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
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.
Okay, so in an even more interesting turn of events, all the land animals emerge somehow from the earth. Yes, this is much more believable than the theory of evolution, which explains how microscopic organisms could have evolved into the many forms of life we see today, and which has a viable explanation for each successive adaptation and why it would have worked. Yes, animals coming right out of the earth� very scientific.
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.
I like how we have �beasts of the earth� and �cattle�. This is definitely springing from the culture of the time, which no doubt thought that cattle deserved a special place in the creation order.
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.
Ah, finally� he gets around to making man. This verse is responsible for so many people�s utter lack of concern about taking care of the earth and respecting the life which lives there. We have �dominion� over everything. How anthropocentric! One would almost think that this was written by humans or something. I�m sure if dolphins ever write a Bible, they will say God gave them dominion over every living thing. What a shock, that men would see themselves as the apex of creation, and as having complete dominion over everything else.
Also interesting here is that God says he will create man in "our" image. I suppose some would say this is in reference to the Trinity, but it's difficult to tell, since there is no context at all. Is God one being or many? It's quite possible that when this was written, polytheism was the prevailing belief. Of course, it's always easy to just force it into whatever we believe nowadays, but the best thing to do is look for the original intent.
27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Okay, I think I�ve seen enough, haven�t you? I tried to give this an honest assessment as someone who just sat down and genuinely took a look at the first chapter of the Bible. Ironically, even though I was a Christian for 8 years, I didn�t spend a lot of time in Genesis. Some of the things I noticed today kind of surprised me, they were so obviously incorrect. I think as a Christian, I really didn�t want to take an honest look at Genesis, so I just sort of skimmed it. But when you really break it down, it becomes painfully obvious that Genesis is not scientifically accurate, and in fact is completely wrong in several places. Moreover, it is written in the style of other creation myths of the day, and does not contain any special knowledge that they do not have.
Perhaps in the future, I will continue on to Genesis 2, but for now this will be available for all who would purport that the Bible is a reliable science manual.
Go to the message board!
