mrfe :
Sincerely_Chris :
SoL@R :
Mother3fan5 :
Barathemos:
darthyoda:

And anyone else that decides they want to join:

Here is the thread where we can discuss what we've read, if you wish. I know I'm a bit late posting this, but I had a pretty busy day and was trying to get work done. I hope you guys read the three chapters! If not, maybe you can read these three and the next three tomorrow?

I'd post my own thoughts, but I've waited too late unfortunately, and I'm pretty tired. I'll do it tomorrow morning. As SoL@R mentioned, there is soooo much to discuss in the first three chapters!

Be blessed,
Love,
Kelli

I actually got done reading them a few minutes ago..... I was busy today due to my mother's birthday.... she turned 58 
I've read these three chapters on my own before, but this time I was drawing more conclusions -w-
I'd share the notes I took, but they'd take up too much space and add to the word count  If anyone does want to see my notes, I'll PM them to you.

But, really.  the chapters describing the creation & the Fall of Man are very interesting..... they give a feel of God's power and describe the history of creation and the beginning moments of the world, which I love -w- Very inspiring.

Congrats to your mother, Mother3fan5!

Alright. *rubs her hands together * I think, in order to make this a little easier on the eyes, I'm going to create a bulleted list. Some of these things seem pretty obvious to me, but I'm often surprised at how many Bible readers don't catch them or don't seem to agree. Feel free to argue any of my points, but please do so respectfully and using Bible scripture to back yourself up. I don't mind if you disagree.... as a Christian , I am constantly seeking to improve my knowledge of the Bible.

I do advise (for any Christian participating in this thread) taking a few moments to pray before receiving His Word. Ask for guidance, an open mind, and wisdom while reading. You never know what new things God may show you!

Oh, and since I'm sure it will be brought up at some point, I'm using The Evidence Bible, a King James Version with commentary by Ray Comfort. It might be closer to a New King James Version though. To explain, I'm just going to quote something from the copyright page:

"The text used in this Bible is a "Comfort-able KJV" a sensitively revised King James version, in which archaic words have been simplified to make God's Words more understandable."

From my notice, only the thee's, thou's, and thine's (etc.) have been edited.

Let's begin!

My thoughts on Genesis 1 :

***God merely has to speak in order to bring things into existence. His sheer power is not something to be mocked, doubted, or laughed at. How many of us can "create" through the use of our voices? One particular thing that I wonder about, however, is how long each of God's creations took to form. He spoke the light and darkness into existence, for example, and this concludes all creation on the first day. I'm sure that if He said "Let light exist", it would just snap into existence, so why did He wait until the next 'day' to create something else? Did He use that time to carefully consider the details of everything He would create and their interactions? Or did He simply admire what was done each day before decided His work was not yet complete? Was it a little of both? In either case, it's astonishing that He could think of soooo much in so little time! If you consider all the intricacies of life and the ways in which everything interacts, it's mind-blowing to think of such perfect detail being covered in the span of one day. And if God spent time to look over His work with pleasure and pride, think about the value He places on everything around us and within us!

***For anyone wondering, I'm pretty sure the firmament created to separate the 'waters' is really our sky. In other words, it's the stuff you see when you stand outside and look up. The term 'heaven' used in these cases is not the same term most of us use to describe a resting place of souls.

***Notice that grass, plants, and all vegetation were created on the third day. As we read on, we see that death did not exist until the 'fall' of mankind. However, plants were being eaten by the creatures of the world. This would mean that, according to Biblical definition, plants are not living matter as we are taught in school.

***How wonderful is it to know that we were made in the image of our very own creator?! As reflections of Himself, He valued us so much that He gave us dominion over all the creatures of the earth... not only of the level which we lived in, but also of the waters and skies.

My thoughts on Genesis 2

***This book starts with the affirmation that all creation was completed by the end of the sixth day. We know through the study of science that energy can not be destroyed or created. Think about the implications of this! I do happen to be a Young Earth Creationist, but if you aren't, the implications should be even more astonishing.

***Although we traditionally appoint Sunday as our 'sabbath', there is no set date for a day of rest. The important concept to take from the first few verses is that we should have a day of rest each week (no matter which weekday it falls on). The benefits of resting at least one day are physical, emotional, mental, AND spiritual.

***I've always thought it would be cool to see the earth 'mist' our vegetation from the ground up.

***Notice that God did not forbid Adam and Eve from eating of the tree of life. I believe this is because God wanted His creations to live forever, and thus eating from that tree would not change His intentions. It was the sin Adam and Eve brought forth that made death enter the world and created the necessity to have the garden guarded.

***For all the naysayers, women were created to be help-mates for men. This does not diminish their importance or value. In fact, the woman Eve had to be formed because no creature in existence could be suitable as a help-mate. Think about this: a woman was the last thing God created, and once she was created, He deemed there to be enough balance in the world. No more creating was needed. (Now, just to delve into some theories: I know there are people out there who believe God did create more people after Eve's creation, since there were apparently cities outside of the garden at some point. Even for a person holding this belief, a woman was still the last 'new' creation. In other words, God didn't design any more blueprints or create any new creatures.)

My thoughts on Genesis 3:

***The first lie the serpent told was that Eve would not die if she ate from the forbidden tree. (Note that he lured her in with a bit of honesty first: "Hasn't God told you that you can't eat of every tree?" Convincing lies almost always have a bit of truth to them to lure in their victim. We have the sensibility to think "Yes, that's true," and then we feed off that assurance and stability.) I think this first lie is very interesting, considering the fact that our culture is obsessed with the idea of living forever.

***The fruit Adam and Eve ate was not necessarily an apple. There is no indication to the appearance of the fruit, other than the fact that it was pleasant to the eyes.

***How marvelous an idea, that the Creator would walk amongst His garden! I highly doubt that Adam and Eve would have hidden from Him if they had not sinned. And of course, God did not need to ask His children where they were or why they were hiding. Nonetheless, He did. This shows how much God values our communication with Him, and how He longs for us to be honest with Him in all things.

***Even though many people bring up the fact that Adam 'pointed fingers', I can't help but notice that Adam did indeed take full responsibility for eating the fruit. He simply stated where he got it from and then said "and I did eat." Eve also admitted her own folly. Notice however, that God did not ask the 'serpent' for an explanation and that the serpent was the first to receive punishment.

***When God dealt punishment to Adam, He was not asserting that men should never listen to their wives. Instead, He was stating that the word of God should be placed above anything a spouse might claim or demand. There is a great deal of scripture dealing with the wisdom of a wife and how a husband should consider it.

***Despite punishing His children, note that God clothed Adam and Eve with coats that He Himself made. He still loved them and cared about them. This also means that God was the first to kill any animals.

***Once death entered the world, as I stated earlier, eating of the tree of life did become forbidden. Although there are critics who claim that Adam and Eve did not die that day as God had promised, this argument is a case of scripture being misconstrued. God never promised an instant death, but said that whoever ate of the tree would surely die. The day Adam and Eve ate of that tree, their bodies began dying.

---

I'll post my thoughts on the next three chapters later, since I'm sure this is more than enough for people to glance through or talk about. XD

Okay. I'll join. I may not be able to post much... Lord willing I will be starting 12th grade in the next two weeks, so I am unsure how much time I will have for this. (FYI: I am starting early, I am home-schooled.)

Alright, so to start off I would like to state that I am reading "Holy Bible with the Apocrypha" which is the new revised standard version with the old and new testimonies and the deuterocanonical books. It is the catholic edition published in 2008. A quite new book.



I will start off my post by talking about a few of singelli's points, then move on to my own points.



Singelli's points:



Genesis 1:



First of all, it was not easy for God to create all of this. "And on the seventh day God finished the work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from the work that he had done." God placed at seventh day on our Sunday, which is the day of rest. As stated in our normal lives, such as yours singelli, it is exhausting to do all of the work and play that we all have to do, so we must have our one day of rest, to be ready to take this all on again. God has taken six days to create this earth, and he needed him to relax. If it was that easy to do it all, why wouldn't he just create something else on the seventh day? Working is hard, so we need that time to relax. Even though he just created everything by saying it, the bible still shows how hard it was for I'm to work.



The separating of the waters by creating the sky was pretty confusing, and what I took it to mean was the sky. What separates us from all the rest of the dangerous universe, the atmosphere.



Correct on your third point. Living matter according to the bible are the animals that God created on the sixth day. These plants were made for us to eat and live off of, correct? Plants aren't alive, as bad as that may sound to many people, they aren't.



Genesis 2:

Truly, I'm going to say that it HAS to be on Sunday (the sabbath) as that is how we made your calendar. The day of rest is on the SEVENTH day, not any other. Sure, rest any day you want, but on the day when you will be with God most, as he is resting too, is on Sunday, the day of rest, also knows as the seventh day of the seven days of creation, in which God will rest with you, as he is still creating.



Yes, as said in my bible God actually wanted Adam and Eve to eat from the tree, so that they would realize what was good and evil, by realizing they were naked. And it also was the first sin, and what started it all.



About the woman thing, I believe that they were made to help men, and God created Eve last because the woman was the most carefully crafted to suit the needs of the man. If God has rushed creating e Woman, there wouldn't be this balance that is set in place.



And now on to Genisis 3:



Your first point, about the serpent, was right on. The serpent did start by saying something that the Woman did know, that they should not eat from the tree, in which she said yes to. After this, the serpent said that they will not die as God knows that you will eat it and you will be able to see what he sees. This got Eve to eat from the tree, and we all know what happens from there.



Yes, it is present to the eyes, as a fruit such as a kiwi or something is, but the wouldn't have the means to open it. The apple is visually appealing and you can just straight eat it, so that is where they got apple from. As stated in the bible, it is "the fruit".



God knew that Adam and Eve has sinned, I believe he was just wondering if they would tell he truth or not, and hat is just what they did. And for him to walk in his own creating, he always does.



Really, he did point figures in my opinion. In my bible it says "I heard the sound of you in the garden, and i was afraid."

"Who told you that you were naked?"

"The women whom you gave to be with me, she gave he the fruit from the tree, and I ate."



To me, this is pointing fingers, as he mentioned that it was the woman who picked the fruit and gave it to him.



I have put all my points in there while talking about singelli's so I think I'm done lol.



God Bless





Singelli :

Is anyone else going to share any thoughts?  I think I'm going to wait until tomorrow to post my next long rambling.    Then at least, maybe some people can get the chance to discuss these three chapters and offer any differing viewpoints.

Barathemos :  Just some questions I have for you. These aren't meant to rub you wrong or prove you wrong... I'm just genuinely curious, because you may know something I don't and can enlighten me (or the other way around!):

**How do you know that God's day of rest is actually Sunday and not some other day?  As far as I'm aware, the Gregarian calendar came into existence in the 1500's.  One thing I hadn't considered though, was that God might have considered His work to be hard. That's a very interesting point to consider.  I also agree with you that our day of rest should be spending special time with God. We should -always- be in communication with Him and striving to be closer to Him, but Sabbath is a day set apart for such a focus.

**Did you make a typo when you said God wanted Adam and Eve to eat from the tree?  If He wanted them to, why would it be a sin?  I think you've either mistyped or maybe misunderstood?

**I also like your idea about God saving the creation of woman as last, so that He could spend His time on her... but I don't know that it's a scripturally supported idea. XD  Is this just a guess of yours or something you've read?

**Couldn't Adam or Eve have opened a fruit with a sharp rock or something?  I guess I never thought about the accessibility of the fruit's meat, but again... I don't know if this is scripturally supported.

1. Honestly, I just believe in the calendar lol. There were calendars before the Gregarian calendar, that some revolved around creation.

And. Now that I think about it, it's a Saturday. God created the world on Sunday, so Saturday is the day of rest. Hm, no wonder it's people's lazy day lol

2. It's a sin because they deceived God, but God knew they would do this. Like a trust exercise.

3. Just a guess of mine lol

4. It's never stated in the text, so I just go with it was a fruit, it gets too complicated. But I did look in my children's bible for this, and it does say apple. Guess it's easier for kids to understand that way.

So sorry guys that I'm only responding now.  I was NEARLY finished with my comments when I closed my browser window by accident... Do not ask.  Just know that it was quite a bit of typing.. lost.  So here I am re-typing and trying to remember all that I have written.  Anyway, it is what it is.

I will - once again - give my comments below and at the same time remark on some of the comments already made.  For the record, I'm using and quoting from the New King James version bible.

Genesis 1

"In the beginning God..."
That is very appropriate.  God IS the beginning of all things.  A common argument from atheists and skeptics is that if all things need a cause, then God must also need a cause. The conclusion is that if God needed a cause, then God is not God and if God is not God, then of course there is no God.  Everyone with a logical brain knows that something does not come from nothing. So, if God is a “something,” then He must have a cause, right?  This is a trick question, because it sneaks in the false assumption that God came from somewhere and then asks where that might be. The answer is that the question does not even make sense. It is like asking, “What does blue smell like?” Blue is not in the category of things that have a smell, so the question itself is flawed. In the same way, God is not in the category of things that are created or caused. God is uncaused and uncreated—He simply exists.  How do we know this? We know that from nothing, nothing comes. So, if there were ever a time when there was absolutely nothing in existence, then nothing would have ever come into existence, but things do exist. Therefore, since there could never have been absolutely nothing, something had to have always been in existence. That ever-existing "thing" (no disrespect) is what we call God. God is the uncaused Being that caused everything else to come into existence.

Another side note is that God is outside of time and time is a CREATED entity (Genesis 1:14). Time did not always exist.  Some always ask "When was that? How long ago was that?" Our minds cannot even fathom or grasp this. I can understand that infinity does exist, I surely can't understand infinity and God is infinite.

Barathemos :  Like Singelli said, I'm not trying to put down your comments in any way, but there are a few things that you mentioned I feel I just need to "correct" because it doesn't line up with God's character as portrayed in His Word.  You said the following, "God has taken six days to create this earth, and he needed him to relax. If it was hat easy to do it all, why wouldn't he just create something else on the seventh day? Working is hard, so we need that time to relax. Even though he just created everything by saying it, the bible still shows how hard it was for I'm to work."
One thing to note is that God is Almighty, Omnipresent, All-knowing, Immutable (does not change), Eternal, Sovereign and God is Spirit.  He does not grow weak or weary.  Isaiah 40:28 - "Have you not known?  Have you not heard?  The everlasting God, the Lord, The Creator of the ends of the earth, Neither faints nor is weary.  His understanding is unsearchable."
So, to attribute a physical human trait like exhaustion to an Infinite, Almighty God, gives the idea that He is fallible, not capable of everything and that some things are a challenge for Him.  If this was the case, then He would not be God.  Nothing is too difficult for Him.  The word "rest" in this context, simply means that God was finished with His creative works.  He had created everything that was needed at this point, and so that was the end of His creative act. He ceased His creative act on the seventh day.  He set the 7th day apart for man's acknowledging of God. The seventh day was to be the day that we acknowledge God and give unto God, and we do it by resting. A day in which we acknowledge the Creator; it's set apart for the recognition of the Creator, as He has so left such ample evidence of Himself in His creation.

Another question that there's a lot of opinions about is the question, does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days?  Did God create in 6 literal days?  For the sake of time, I'm not going to delve into this.  A careful examination of the Hebrew word for “day” and the context in which it appears in Genesis will lead to the conclusion that “day” means a literal, 24-hour period of time.  There's obviously much more to it, but for now this will have to suffice.  Some Bible readers use 2 Peter 3:8 which reads, in part, "with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day " to support their view of 1 day = a thousand years. The passage has nothing to do with creation, however, and is not meant to define how God experiences time, since He is timeless. Instead, it is meant to encourage us while we wait for Jesus' return.  So a day is a day.  Period.  Not a thousand or a million years.

Genesis 2

Singelli, I just found it interesting that you said in one of your thoughts on Genesis 2, "Notice that God did not forbid Adam and Eve from eating of the tree of life."  Genesis 2:16-17 reads, And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Would you care elaborating on this?  Why did you say that God did not forbid them or am I misreading your comment?

Genesis 3

Notice when Eve sinned and took some of the fruit of the tree of life, God wasn't looking for her.  Genesis 3:9 reads, "Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you?”  God was calling to Adam, not that God did not know where Adam was. He wanted man to recognize it and confess it.  It was more in a sense of, "Adam, where are you?  You were supposed to protect Eve from the deception of the Devil!  Where were you?"  It gives us insight on how important God views the Spiritual responsibility of the husband in the household.  Husbands or the men of the house are responsible for the Spiritual welfare of his wife and kids.  If my wife "suffers" spiritually and does not grow with her walk with God, God will look at me, the husband, one day and ask, "Where were you?"  Husbands need to protect their wives, not just physically, but Spiritually as well.

Lastly, notice that Adam and Eve immediately tried to cover themselves with fig leaves.  For those of you who has seen a fig leaf, it is quite prickly, so this wouldn't have been very comfortable covering.  This was the beginning of religion.  Man endeavoring by his own efforts to cover up his guilt / sins.  You cannot by your own works or by confessing it to a priest or by paying a church, have your sins forgiven to obtain eternal life.  Only by repentance (turning away) of your sins and by confessing that Jesus Christ is Lord and believing that He died for your sins on the Cross and that God raised Him up from the dead on the third day, will you be granted everlasting life.  There is no other way.

Genesis 4:

***I don't know if it's important to note, but one of my first thoughts in reading Genesis 4 is that Cain and Abel both held very different responsibilities within their family. Cain specialized in working with the ground while Abel's expertise was in tending the herds. Neither of them strived to be an expert in both fields. We tend to follow the same model today by specializing in a certain career or interest. It's more beneficial to improve one craft consistently, than to master everything. This is probably one of the main reasons assembly lines are so effective.

***This chapter also contains the first recorded murder. Although there is a lot of speculation concerning God's displeasure with Cain, I lean towards the idea that Cain's heart was not right with God when he made his offering. Hebrews 11:4 states "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous..."

***I can't say that I blame Cain for being upset when God did not respect his offering. That being said, Cain's anger was full of pride and self-righteousness. God opened a door for communication on the issue, but Cain responded by later murdering his own brother and lying about it to boot. Although God certainly knew the foul act Cain had committed, He gave Cain a chance to take responsibility and Cain failed to do so.

***Reading about Cain's punishment brings up several curiosities for me. First, I wonder how difficult it was to till the land after he was punished. God didn't instate the need to take care of the land until Adam sinned. Genesis 3:17-19 discusses how tedious this task would be. Thorns and thistles would come up from the ground, and the work would cause men to sweat. If the work required this much energy, how much more effort did Cain have to exert?

Secondly, in the midst of these verses, we readers get the first hint of life outside of Eden. Cain speaks fear of men seeking his death. Since Adam called Eve the 'mother of all living', there are only a few theories which can be considered. Adam and Eve, for example, might have had other children. Enough time would have passed for those children to grow up and reproduce. Incest was not yet against the law, after all. Another theory (suggested by Ray Comfort), is that Adam and Eve's sons could have been given wives in the same way that Eve was given to Adam. However, I can't say that I'm fond of this theory since God's creation days were over once Eve was finished. If God wanted to continue creating things, why would He have instructed Noah to save any animals at all? God could have saved Noah a lot of trouble by simply killing off all animals and then creating new ones.

Finally, I am curious about the mark that God set upon Cain in order to protect him. What was it about this mark that would let men be wary of killing Cain? Was it an obvious 'defect' that would cause people to question Cain so that he could warn them? Or was there something about the mark that let viewers innately know the risks associated with killing him?

***When reading the short genealogy at the end of this chapter, I can't help but be amazed at everything humans had thought of already. Tents! Harps! Organs! Smithing brass and iron! While it is true that these people typically lived for almost 1,000 years, I still find their progress astonishing. I wonder how much of the knowledge God had a direct involvement in. Certainly, God didn't allow His people to be helpless.

Genesis 5:

***I always assumed that within paternal genealogies, the first-born son was the line followed. However, this list starts with Seth, who was born after both Cain and Abel (and whoever else Adam and Eve might have conceived). I might have noticed this before, but I feel more cognisant of the fact now.

***It's interesting (to me) to read about the first man God took up from the earth, because it happens so early in the Bible. I wish more was said about his walk with God. I also wonder if anybody witnessed the event and how it made them feel. Were peopled shocked and confused? Or being more open to God than we are now, did they simply accept the fact without question?

*** I also think it's interesting to see how quickly life spans began to dwindle. When the earth was freshly created, environmental conditions were at their best. What did these men do to change that so rapidly? After all, they did not have the same destructive and pollutive technology we have today.

***It can be seen that names were often recycled in the early ages of men. I think it's important to note that there was only one language at this point in time. As I was reading this passage, I wondered how the event surrounding the tower of Babylon affected naming decisions. Is there a clear difference in naming patterns after people were confounded with new languages? Was it less common to recycle names? I need to try and keep this in mind as we read along.

Genesis 6:

***I wonder why God chose 120 years.

***I think verse 6 here is the first time we hear of God grieving. Grieving is such a powerful word, and to me, really speaks volumes about how much God loves us and how much He expects from us. He holds a lot of hope and faith in our ability to be everything He wants us to be. God calls us to perfection because He expects it from us and believes us to be capable of achieving it. After all, I would never set an expectation for anyone (children/ students/ friends /employees) that I believed could not be met. It would be a waste of my time, emotions, hope, and faith.

***Imagine how vastly different Noah must have been from those around him! God was going to destroy the WHOLE world.... and yet He found ONE man whom He favored. There had to be hundreds or thousands of people on the planet by the time Noah was born, and yet he was the sole one worth saving. I think as Christians, we often feel discouraged by being the 'odd one' or not fitting in. If we follow God's calling, we should never feel discouraged by our uniqueness. It might very well save our lives.

***Not only did God value Noah's dedication, but He valued Noah's happiness. God was perfectly capable of killing off everyone and creating Noah a new wife. Instead, He also assured the safety of those Noah probably cared most about: his wife, his sons, and his son's wives.

I also love the last verse of this chapter: "Thus Noah did, according to all that God commanded him, so did he." This succinct fact alludes to the idea that God's command was supreme over any setbacks or emotions Noah might have faced. Although building such a boat was undoubtedly a huge undertaking, and although Noah knew that everyone around him would be destroyed (including friends if he had any)... Noah DID it. The statement is simple and unarguable: God told him to do it, so he did it. If only we could so faithfully follow God's leadership!

Genesis 7:

***Another childhood myth is that Noah carried two of every animal into the ark. As impossible as this would seem, Noah was actually instructed to carry many more. He was to carry two of every UNCLEAN animal, and then seven (or seven pairs?) of every CLEAN animal. Since Noah would make sacrifices after the flood waters dissipated, it was necessary to carry more than one pair of clean animals. If Noah had only taken one pair and then sacrificed them, the animals would have then been extinct.

***Not only was the flood created by water from the heavens (the first rain!), but it also spewed up from the depths of the earth.

***I don't want to delve into the dreary, but reading through this chapter, I couldn't help but think about how terrifying it must have been to be one of the people left behind. The water didn't suddenly appear and stifle the breath from everyone all in a few minutes of time. Imagine being one of the sinners and watching water fall from the sky and come up from the ground. Imagine it not ceasing. I'm sure people didn't just lie down and accept the fact that they were going to die. I'm sure they rushed to higher ground, but in the end, even this could not save them. I wonder how many called out to God and regretted what they had done. Were they so wicked that they continued to scoff in God's face? The Bible keeps no secrets that the depravity of men was immense, so I think the latter is probably closer to the truth.

Genesis 8:

*** I wonder if the waters of the flood were tumultuous. The last part of verse 1 states that the waters were assuaged, which means calmed. The second verse is written as though to add onto that thought, continue it. Therefore, I do not think the first verse refers to the rain being calmed, or the fountains becoming weaker. If the flood waters did toss the boat around, what a ride that must have been! I bet Noah and his family had their jobs cut out for them keeping the animals calm (assuming God did not do it Himself).

***I think it's interesting that Noah chose to send a dove forth, and that the Holy Spirit descend upon Christ in the form of a dove at one point.

***Not only is it awesome that God vows never to destroy the earth again, but His promise actually goes a bit deeper. He also promises that seasons of harvest, seasons of weather, seasons of temperate, seasons of weather, and seasons of time will all continue.

---

I'll do the rest tomorrow and catch up. It's getting late for me and I have work tomorrow.

God bless!

---

Since nobody is really posting and I have no way of even knowing if people are participating, I'm just going to add onto this thread before I get too far behind. I'll work on this little by little, since I'm also trying to meet a few work deadlines.

Genesis 9:

***I never really thought of it, but the second verse of this chapter discusses how animals fear people.

*** In the verses surrounding God's covenant, I've heard people quote that God promised never to destroy the earth again. However, in these verses He actually promises never to destroy it via a flood.

***Ham must have told his brothers about his father's nakedness, but did not act to help solve the problem. I think this is a fault most of us need to work on as well. If we see a problem, we shouldn't walk around complaining about it unless we have a suggested solution. If we are always complaining about others and not offering to be a part of the solution, we bring disharmony, distrust, and disrespect to ourselves and those around us.

Genesis 10:

***Verse 5 mentions people being divided by their tongue. The Biblical timeline is an area of weakness for me, but I'm guessing that this means the event surrounding the Tower of Babylon had taken place by this point in the genealogy.

***It's interesting (to me) that Mizraim passed the last two letters of his name to all of his (recorded) children. I wonder if he had strong pride in his family, or if there was a cultural reason for this. Cush seemed to name most of his (recorded) children with a name ending in 'ah' as well.

***After reading this chapter, it's clear that Noah's son followed God's command to go forth and multiply. What an impressive family it became!

Chapter 11:

***Was everyone on earth traveling together when they moved to Shinar? I guess at this point, 'the whole earth' wouldn't be too large to make this unfeasible. Why were they concerned about being spread abroad, however? I wonder if their population was growing large enough to cause problems, and if talk was going around on the fact that they eventually would not be able to travel together.

***We see man's vanity and pride in their desire to make a name for themselves. These were, after all, "children of men". Remember that Noah was the one man God respected enough to save, but there's no telling how far his sons had strayed from God. Passing their ways onto their children was very likely, and their unity was beginning to make them feel powerful.

***This family line traces all the way to Abraham. We see in the last verse that Abraham's brother Haran (the father of Lot) died. Also, Nahor married his niece, Haran's daughter. I wonder why Nahor and Milcah did not travel with the rest of the family when they went to dwell in the city named Haran. Perhaps Nahor and Milcah were already living there, and the rest of the family was coming to join them after Haran's death? Maybe reading further will clear this up. (I guess I wonder too much. It's not as though the Bible can cover every detail of the history. I just find it interesting and wish there was a way to know more. It can be dangerous, after all, to assume too much.)

Singelli:  Thank you for the Lazarus tip.  Will keep it in mind.  I usually type my posts in Wordpad first so I can save it.  Then I just copy and paste it here, but the one time I didn't do that, I ended up messing it up  

Thank you for pointing out the two trees and making things more clear.  I totally missed that :/

Fig leaves...The ones we have here in my country are rough, with fine "hairs" on the top, that's where I get the "prickly" description from and underneath it is indeed velvety and soft.  I very much liked the comment from W.L. Wilson regarding the fig leaves.

Right on to Genesis chapter 4 to 6.

Genesis 4

I'm just echoing Singelli's comments here.  Why did God accept Abel's sacrifice and not Cain's?  Like Singelli said, in Hebrews 11:4 it tells us, "By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks."  So that's the basic difference.  Abel believed and trusted God and Cain did not.  All the sacrifices you make without faith are worthless before God, because Hebrews 11:6 teaches us, "But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."  The "money shot" - The faith was the quality that made Abel's sacrifice acceptable unto God.

Another question that comes up a lot is "Where did Cain get his wife?"  Some try and speculate and builds a whole doctrine around speculation, but the fact of the matter is that the genealogical records that are given to us in the Bible are not at all complete.  The Lord is interested really in only one genealogical line. And that is the line that comes from Abraham, through David to Christ.  The late Pastor Chuck Smith commented, "None of the rest of them are really important. Some of the families are followed for a little while just to give you sort of a brief historic background to show you areas of the world that were populated by certain people, descendants of certain people. But they will only trace other lines for just a short way, it cuts off, and the basic line that we are going to follow is the line that will lead from Adam to Abraham, from Abraham to David, and from David to Jesus Christ. After Jesus Christ, genealogical records are of no value. We don't need them anymore. The only value of holding or maintaining a genealogical record is to bring it down to Jesus Christ, so that when He is born it will be proved that God fulfilled his promise to David and to Abraham, that through thy seed shall the nations of the world be blessed."

Genesis 5

I don't have much to say here, but a few interesting things to note is where did all these records came from that Moses got together when he wrote this book?  Writing was invented very early in history, but prior to writing, it came by verbal communication.  One thing to remember is that Adam grew VERY old.  He lived to be 930 years old.  So Adam no doubt told his sons, his grandsons, his great grandsons, his great, great grandsons, his great, great, great grandsons and so on.  He had the opportunity to tell them the whole Eden account.  Straight from the horses mouth. Undiluted.  So if you look at the geneaologies and work it out, Adam was still alive when Lamech was born.  He technically could've sat at Adam's feet for a hundred years, listening to Adam's experience in the garden.  Lamech then could've told his son Noah and Noah then could've shared it with his son Shem and then Shem was still alive when Abraham was born.  So in reality you have a link between Adam and Lamech, then a cross-over link, Lamech telling his son Noah, Noah sharing with his son Shem and Shem sharing with Abraham.

Another interesting thing is that there are other records of the flood in Babylon, Egypt, India - most of which are exaggerated accounts of the flood, but some of them are very parallel to the biblical account.  Does it disprove the Bible because the Indians, Inca Indians, the Babylonians, the Egyptians etc. had an account of the flood?  No.  It proves the common origin of man.

Genesis 6

This is a huge chapter.  Huge in the sense of there's so much to comment on.  I am going to leave a lot of things out, but I want to focus on two things, the Ark and the Flood.

The ark was 300 cubits long and 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high.  A cubit is about 18 inches long which means the ark was four hundred and fifty feet long, one hundred and fifty feet wide, and forty-five feet tall.  It was 3 stories high, 15 feet each.  The total surface area of the ark or shall I say, "volume" of the ark was the equivalent of about five hundred and twenty two cattle cars of a train.  So the ark was quite a big boat and not the puny little sailing ships depicted in childrens' bibles.  What is also interesting to note is that the ark is six times as long as it is wide.  Today we have discovered that this is the ideal ratio for a ship's length to width.  Most of our Navy ships are just about the same ratio.  People these days have a lot of problems with the ark, saying that how is it possible to fit all the animals of the world into one little boat.  Well, first of all, as I've just shown, the ark was not "little".  Secondly, when Noah brought the animals into the ark, it was all after their KIND.  In other words, he did not have to bring in daschunds, collies, spaniels etc.  He only needed to bring in one pair of dogs.  There are mutant strains that do exist and there is definitely mutational changes that takes place on a horizontal plane within a family, within a specie of say dogs.  You don't get vertical changes from one species to another and this is where the theory of evolution fails to prove the existence of any transitional form.  The same goes for cats.  Just one pair of cats would be enough.  What about dinosaurs?  Man, I would love to extend on this, but I'll save it for another thread.  Think baby dinosaurs, then it would've been absolutely possible to fit them onto the ark.  No one said the animals were all fully grown.  God is of course much wiser than that.
In 1917 there was a report of a Russian flyer who spotted, as he was flying in the area of Mount Ararat, a great boat in the ice.  According to his story, an expedition was formed and at the time that they were coming out with the evidence, the Bolshevik revolution took over and all the evidence was destroyed.  This pilot later went to Canada and told his story which caused others to try and find this boat.  One of these was a French explorer, Francis Navarro.  He actually brought back wood from this object that he found high above the timberline encased in ice and he described it in his book, "Noah's Ark, I touched it".  There are attempts at expeditions now, but the Turkish government, being Muslim controlled, are disallowing any kind of expedition.  There are men of science that would like to go up and settle the issue once and for all, but the Turkish government is opposed to it.  If the ark could be discovered, then of course it would create an interesting problem for the scientist.  How did the boat get up there so high?

On to the flood.  The idea of a worldwide flood is opposed to the Uniformitarian theory upon which evolution is based.  According to Wikipedia, Uniformitarianism is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe.  Emmanuel Villakoski first came out with his book, "Worlds in Collision" and it was first published by McMillan. The professors were so angry that this book was published because it showed the impossibility of Uniformitarianism, totally disproving it.  Before people had full copies of the book, they were already writing rebuttals, not even knowing for sure what he said.  I am not generalizing, but a lot of scientists are dishonest.  When their pet theory is destroyed, they will lie, connive and do as much as possible to ensure that their theory stays alive and this pet theory is that man exists by an evolutionary process.  The reason why the love that theory so much is because it is able to exclude God from the system.  Today there is so much evidence that's being uncovered that is seriously hurting that theory and you really must have a lot of faith to believe in such an incredible bunch of non-sense.
The thing about Emmanuel Villakoski is that he doesn't even really believe that the Bible is the Word of God. In fact, there are parts of the Bible that he completely rejects. He's not a Christian; he's a Jewish scientist, but he looks at the Bible as a history book, and he takes the things that happened or that the Bible declares happens.  Emmanuel Villakoski has written a new book, "Earth in Upheaval".  In this book he tells about the bones of whales that have been found four hundred and forty feet above sea level north of Lake Ontario. A skeleton of another whale was discovered in Vermont more than five hundred feet above sea level and still another in Montreal, Quebec area about six hundred feet above sea level. Now people don't carry the carcass of a whale five hundred feet up the mountain and several miles from the ocean. So the question is how did the whales get there?  He has his own theory of the thrusting upward of mountain ranges and that is what he is seeking to prove in this book "Earth's in Upheaval" that the mountain ranges have all been thrust upward in very recent history.  Rather than the mountains being thrust upwards, what about the water being thrust upwards and covering the area and the whales swimming there until the waters receded and they happened to get caught and was left floundering as the waters receded off of the face of the earth? That's just as plausible as his upward thrust theory, but a little more scriptural.  There were a lot of other findings and evidences of a worldwide flood, but there's too many to mention here.  

God has left evidence and men are misinterpreting quite often the evidence that God has left.  However, there is not one good reason to believe that these remains were not left by a great flood and that these areas were indeed covered with water unto fifteen feet above the highest mountains, just like the scriptures declares.

I know I'm a bit behind, but I'll catch up with Genesis 7-9 soon