Curious what theologians throughout history made of Genesis 4

Genesis 1: 20-23 - 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.”

Birds aren’t marine animals. The mention of birds here makes it apparent it’s not just talking about marine animals.

@Jeremy_Christian

The bottom line is that Evolution did happen, and we are doing our best to integrate it into the reasoning that seems consistent with the Old and New Testaments.

In my personal view, Evolution appears to be the FAVORED way that God creates. And when humanity had achieved a certain level of sophistication, God needed to introduce Atonement… and he did it through 2 humans with a very special preparation.

So he made these 2 special humans to be identical physiologically with the evolved population … and then the “Moral Education” class began.

@Jeremy_Christian

I don’t think you can get that kind of conclusion from what we read.

The reason birds are mentioned along with Fish is because the Genesis Scribe reasoned that fish arise out of terrestrial waters… and BIRDS arise out of celestial waters.

This is, of course, bonkers. It’s just plain wrong. Just like the firmament is just plain wrong… and I’ve spared you all the discussion we could have with that.

It’s wrong. Period. Why you want to treat a part of Genesis as brilliantly right … I have no idea.

Okay. For moral education you need free will. Without it there is no morality. God called all before Adam/Eve “good”. Morality only comes into play when there’s something other than “good”.

Whether you realize it or not, we’re more in agreement than you think.

Where’d you get that?

Ridiculous. @Jeremy_Christian, are you saying that God can’t say “Good pie” without the pie being morally superior?

He said Adam and Eve didn’t know the difference between Good and Evil. Does that mean Adam and Eve, in the state of ignorance, are morally Good? Or does it mean they aren’t either good or evil … YET?

ADDENDUM

I got that answer from analyzing the Hebrew… something you should have learned about 10 years ago. Are you familiar with the concept of the Celestial Waters? Or is that new to you as well?

Without free will you are only capable of good because you are not capable of behaving contrary to God’s will. God calling all of creation good mean it all works according to His will.

@Jeremy_Christian

That’s why the Geneal.Adam scenarios have both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 humans with Free Will. You are the one trying to make one group different from the other in terms of Free Will.

It’s a non-starter.

And God said, "Let the waters bring forth … moving creature … fowl

This just says “the waters”. I don’t think you got “celestial waters” from the text. That more comes from other mythologies to my knowledge.

I see nothing here that suggests any difference between the “waters” that both animals are being called from.

@Jeremy_Christian

Are you familiar with the concept of Celestial Waters or not?

In the first part of Genesis 1, there is clearly a division of The Waters into
Earthly and Celestial waters.

Both waters bring forth animals… but the celestial waters can’t bring forth fish, right?

Which is inconsistent with the text. Gen1 humans were given commands that would take numerous generations to carry out. And then God called them “good”. Adam/Eve got just one command and they broke it. Generation 1. Could they really have been expected to do what the Gen1 humans were told to do? Could they have been called “good”.

There’s a distinct difference between the Gen1 humans and Adam/Eve.

@Jeremy_Christian

The only difference is that Adam and Eve got an advanced course in Righteousness.

Genesis 1 and 2 humans both had Free Will.

Genesis 1 and 2 were both ignorant of Good and Evil (because no human had yet accessed the Tree of Good and Evil).

And then God gave a PhD in morality to two humans that would change the rest of the world.

God also called “the waters” good… is that because the waters had free will?

But not as much time as evolution. And reproduction isn’t the same thing as creation. All the sea and air animals were created on day 5, and all the land animals were created on day 6. That’s what the text says. Your obfuscation doesn’t change that.

Yes. They’re talking about marine animals and birds. Not dinosaurs. Dinosaurs would be day 6, I note you brought up dinosaurs to explain the sea monsters. Dinosaurs aren’t sea monsters.

1 Like

Ah, okay. I see how you see that.

This is another misconception cleared up with modern knowledge. The formation of the atmosphere lines up with these lines. But it does not make the distinction that birds came from the sky/celestial waters.

When it later says all the water was gathered together in one place, does this include the “celestial water” as well?

Look, the point is each creation lines up incredibly well with how things actually developed. Life did start from the sea. The mention of birds means it includes animals that existed outside of the sea.

" fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply on the earth"

When it speaks of " cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth" it’s speaking to bronze age humans about animals bronze age humans would be familiar with.

An advanced course? And this warranted a whole other line of humans?

No, nothing “good” had free will. That’s why it was good. What’s “good” is nature. Nature works according to natural law/God’s will. The A/E story illustrates the difference. They had free will.

@Jeremy_Christian

You are getting pretty desperate here…
the part where the waters are being gathered… those are the “waters beneath heaven”.

As for “fowl multiply” … if you get to change things… so do I.

Instead, read the King James version:

Gen 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.”

It doesn’t say “on” the Earth… it says “IN” the Earth.

In other words, this is not a reference to Earth, it’s a reference to “the land/the region/the country”.

It’s not a reference to birds multiplying on or in literal dirt.

The text also says “be fruitful/multiply/fill the earth”. Point being, what was set in motion on each “day” wasn’t completed that same day.

No, it doesn’t. You’re cherry-picking and force-fitting again. You’re filing away at both the square peg and the round hole.

Yes, including terrestrial reptiles, the sauropsids you’re on about. Amphibians too. And most likely insects and other arthropods. You force the text to fit your preconceptions. It’s fish (including whales) and birds on day 5, land animals on day 6.

1 Like