GENESIS AND NO RAIN BEFORE NOAH?
The following was a debate on this subject in 1997 on a "forum"
I was on.
This subject is NOT a matter of salvation, but you may find it
interesting. I give my answers to a somewhat "common" teaching
that there was NO rain before the days of Noah.
NO rain teaching:
The following is the scriptural evidence for a water heaven--a
canopy rather than clouds of today which are IN not ABOVE the
firmament-heaven. This is listed in Joseph Dillow's book, THE
WATERS ABOVE:
My answer:
It is time for me to get my sleeves rolled up and answer. First
let me say that as far as the "technical" science that Dillow
puts forth I am NOT qualified to answer or argue with. I am not
skilled in such matters, but I did appreciate the answers we
received from Ewin on this technical side of things. I know that
for every specialist of science that puts forth a theory or dogma
there is another scientist to contradict the first one.
I will with the skills I have stick to the Bible.
No rain teaching:
l.There was no rain. A mist came up instead (Genesis 2:5-6).
The cool of the day would condense a mist out; no erosion or
floods - nothing violent.
My answer:
A very common argument. It has sometimes been assumed that there
was no rain upon the earth until the days of the flood of Noah.
Sermons have been told about Noah building the ark - all of which
made him appear insane as there had been no rain. But is that
what the Bible says? Take a very close look at Gen.2:4-6.
This passage is talking about plants and herbs BEFORE they grew,
created as full grow, and BEFORE man was created. Before man and
before plants seeded themselves and grew, a mist went up from the
earth and watered the ground. Usually if you buy a plant from the
store and dig it into your garden you will immediately water it
also to get it started well. So it was with God. After He created
these plants full grown, He watered them. As man had not yet been
created to care for them, and other things were still to be
re-organized in the earth and heaven which would take its natural
course to produce rain, God watered these plants with a mist, a
dew if you like, all around the earth.
This passage describes the condition of things BEFORE there was a
man to till the ground, and before conditions that make rain
happen. It was AT THIS TIME that it had not yet rained upon the
earth. Would this necessarily prove it did not rain after the
Lord made man? Can this passage prove it did not rain until the
days of the flood of Noah, which was well over a thousand years
later?
What this passage says is simply this: there was a time when the
Lord had not caused it to rain on the earth. It also says there
was no man and that plants were not yet seeding and growing. But
soon plants did seed and grow. Soon there was a man on the earth.
The very fact that Moses (the author of Genesis) mentions rain and
that it did not rain until there was a man to till the ground
suggests to me that IT DID RAIN after there was a man, and after
plants started to seed themselves. Moses could have easily,
somewhere in these first few chapters of Genesis(up to the flood
time) stated: "It never rained upon the earth until the flood."
Or "The earth was watered by a mist from the time of Adam to the
flood of Noah." Such language would have been simple for Moses to
have written, but he did not come close to saying any such words.
All he says here is that until man, God watered the plants and
herbs with a mist, and in mentioning rain, the conclusion is, it
then did rain after man was created. Rain is SO COMMON that if we
had a whole AGE of no rain, I believe we would have been told
VERY PLAINLY somewhere in the Bible, but such plain words are not
to be found.
No rain teaching:
Four rivers ran through the entire earth (2:10-14).
My answer:
I see no words in this passage that talk about "the whole earth"
or the "entire earth." I see words such as "Eden" - "garden" -
"whole land" - Ethiopia" - "Assyria." Obviously this is the area
where man was created and is the focal point of the narrative.
God
is not dealing with the North American area, or the land that
became Australia, or China, or Brazil. Even if He was, what has
four rivers got to do with rain or no rain for an entire age?
Rivers run today to the sea, water evaporates from the sea into
the air to meet cold masses and form clouds that meets other air
to produce rain, that flows into rivers to the sea, and so the
cycle continues. This passage proves nothing about the idea of no
rain until the flood of Noah.
No rain teaching:
There was one basic location for the sea (1:9).
My answer:
There was no dry land at this time. The words and figure
of speech Moses used here MAY NOT mean that there was just ONE
LAND MASS and one SEA MASS. It may be just a language speech that
is telling us God here brought the land called earth into being
from the waters called seas. You will notice NOTHING is said
about "the earth being in one place." The sea of the world could
be said to be "unto one place" because the sea is connected as
one. Two thirds of the earth is sea. Look at a world globe, where
is the sea not connected as one. We may give different parts of
that one different sea names (the Atlantic, the Pacific etc.) but
it is all one. The earth masses NOT so. Some want to say the land
mass was all one at one time, there may be some truth to parts
having been together once and split away later. But to try to be
dogmatic about all land being one at the beginning is pure
speculation. The Bible is silent on the matter.
And even if it was so, what has that got to do with proving the
no rain until the flood idea?
It still rains on the huge land mass of the
Europe/Russian/China etc. nations.
No rain teaching:
Eden was elevated so river water fed from springs (as the
Millennial Jerusalem to come - same spot as Eden(?)) flowed
downhill to the rest of the planet. The rivers were sluggish
without much gradient and little erosion resulted.
My answer:
So what I ask? What has any of that got to do with no rain until
the flood theory? Will there be no rain in the Millennium?
No creation of rain is mentioned, only another means of
watering. I've answered that above covering Gen.2:4-6.
Genesis is a book of beginnings and when an event happens it is
most likely the first occurrence and when it first originated.
Moses mentions rain in chapter 2:4-6, only that it had not rained
upon the earth before man was created to till the ground. I think
it is quite clear what Moses was saying. After man and after the
plants seeded themselves it did rain.
No rain teaching:
There were no rainbows prior to the Deluge (9:13).
My answer:
So what I ask? Are you trying to tell me God MUST HAVE rainbows
to have it rain on the earth? It is written: "all things are
possible with God." You nor I were living back then, nor do you
know anyone who was, nor do we have any written scientific log
books from that time, telling us the science God used during that
age. If God wanted it to rain on the earth, He sure did not HAVE
to use as automatic "can't be done without" rainbows. You are
trying to tie a present reality with the science that goes with
it, to prove a past reality (the way you claim it was) that God
does not need, because He can do anything as He wills with what
science or unscientific(as some things science cannot explain)
way He chooses. God is not dependant upon how WE say it should be
through our science.
No rain teaching:
Rainbows can only be produced when droplet size is greater than
.30 millimeters, thus rain drops not mist make rainbows possible.
Small rainbows could be made artificially with sprinkling water
and a light source, but the grand and glorious natural ones are
spoken of here. No rain, a mist and no rainbow mutually
reinforce each other.
My answer:
I am not a scientist. No need to get into the scientific side of
rainbows anyway. The Bible tells us very plainly WHY God created
the rainbow. It had nothing to do with mist or rain at all. Read
Gen.9:8-17. God set the rainbow in the clouds or the sky for ONE
REASON ONLY. To remind mankind of the sworn covenant God made
with all mankind and living creatures - flesh would never again
be cut off from the earth by a flood of waters. That's it! No
more and no less! God created the science(if you want to look at
it from the physical) for rainbows at THIS TIME. Then maybe not,
who knows, the science may have already been there but God simply
chose not to have rainbows BEFORE this time. He is God you know,
not us. He can do want He likes when He likes, with whatever He
likes. That is why scientists who do not believe in God get all
messed up, because some things DEFY science, and the Lord sits
back and laughs at them.
Can it rain upon the earth WITHOUT rainbows? On, you bet it can!
I lived for 18 years(the first of my life) in England. I have
seen it rain, and rain, and thunder storm and rain, for probably
hundreds of days in those 18 years, and only NOW and THEN during
all those rain days, was there a rainbow in the sky.
I lived in Florida for three years(1992-95). During the summer
months it rains at least once a day for an hour or so. Most of
those days you never see a rainbow, only now and then is there
one.
I lived on the prairies of Canada, in the Toronto area for 12
years. I've lived in B.C. for three years. I travelled all over
North America, east, west, north, and south. I'm now living in
N.B. the far east of Canada. Seen many many days of rain over
those years, and few rainbow times.
Can it rain WITHOUT rainbows appearing? I guess it can! So why
should it seem incredulous to think God could have an age(from
Adam to Noah) where it rained but never had a rainbow?
No rain teaching:
Signs and seasons (1:14) were told upon the creation of the
apparent heavenly bodies which regulate them. The Sabbath
(2:2-3) was declared when the 7th day was sanctified. Cain's
mark (4:15) was explained when it was created. Prior usage,
therefore, suggests that the introduction of an item as a sign
amounts to the introduction of the item itself. Covenant signs
as baptism and circumcision are for man, but rainbows are for
God to remember and made by God. The other signs remind man of
an obligation--the rainbow reminds God of one; thus, it is a
different category of sign.
There were no seasons prior to the Deluge (8:22).
My answer:
Wait a minute, this verse does not say(God speaking): "Now I will
create different seasons, now there will be seedtime and harvest
time, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and right, as there
were none before this flood."
Was there day and night before the flood? You bet! Was there
seedtime and harvest before the flood? I guess so! Cain and Abel
brought offerings of the land to the Lord. Adam was to produce
from the land but it was also to yield "thorns and thistles" as
well, for his sin. Cain was to till the ground but it would not
yield its full strength, a part of his penalty for his sin.
As all these were before the flood, was there also cold and
heat(I'm not saying cold like the South Pole or heat like humid
south Florida), summer and winter(again I'm not saying they
contrasted each other like they do in Canada and the northern
USA)? They are all mentioned in the same breath. As there were
some before the flood the logic says there were the others also.
This verse is NOT telling us that God was NOW, after the flood
creating these things. The context goes back to verse 21. God had
brought to an end for a period of time(while the waters were upon
the earth), as looking at things from the surface of the
earth(standing on the land of the earth), seedtime, harvest,
cold, heat, summer, winter, day and night. If you had been able
to survive(in some plastic bubble) on the land of the earth under
the water, you would not have been able to have experienced ANY
of the things God here mentions, not even day and
night(everything would have been black as coal under the water
that covered the hills and the mountains (chapt.7:19,20). Which
by the way clearly shows there were hills and mountains before
the flood for the waters of the flood covered them.
Because of the evil of the heart of man, God had for a time
brought seedtime, harvest, cold, heat, summer, winter, day and
night to an end. Mankind, in Noah's society, had come to an end
except Noah and his family (8 persons). Now God was making a
promise to Noah, and to all mankind from that day forth, that He
would while His physical plan was still in the physical, never
again destroy every living thing in whom was the breath of life,
by the waters of a huge flood. He was promising in this
verse 22, that while the physical earth remained, the natural
things He had created from the beginning of the re-forming of the
earth would continue, would not cease. That's what God is saying
here! He was certainly NOT saying "I will now create these
things ...... which did not exist in the pre-flood age." If
God was now creating these things then plain words of creation
would have been used as was in chapter 1 and 2. Such words were
not used and I contend that they were not because such things had
been from the beginning.
No rain teaching:
Seasons in 1:14 refer to the Feasts as Leviticus 23:4,
God-appointed Holy Days which must have been known before the
Deluge. The Hebrew word "moadim" specifically indicates these
special days. Ordinary weekly Sabbaths only require knowing 7-day
cycles. The seasons were named after the deluge was over. There
was a uniform temperature with the canopy and slight air
movement. Again, first mention, first existence and an
interdependence of no rain, mist, no rainbow, and no seasons.
My answer:
..................
Was there no RAIN until Noah's life?Genesis 1:14 and Noah getting Drunk?Continuing the debate about NO RAIN before Noah's life
No rain teaching:
Deluge was over. There was a uniform temperature with the canopy
and slight air movement. Again, first mention, first existence
and an interdependence of no rain, mist, no rainbow and no
seasons
My answer:
Of course you would have to understand Gen.1:14 as "festivals"
and not "seasons of the year." If you admitted there were seasons
then you would have to come close to admitting there could well
have been rain within "seasons of the year."
You say Genesis 1:14 and the word "moadim"(seasons) = God's
festivals of Lev.23.
This Hebrew word is indeed used for God's festivals in the first
five books. Because it is, some have been quick to dogmatically
proclaim loud and strong that God's festivals were from the very
beginning. Even Adam Clarke has an interesting comment on this
line of thought in his famous Bible Commentary. This Hebrew word
is number 4150 in Strong's Concordance. In the "Englishman's
Hebrew Concordance" you will find every place in the OT where
this word is used(page 672 in the edition I have). The
"Theological Wordbook of the OT" has much to say about this word,
Vol.l, Page 387/88. In Ex.34:18 we have it translated "in the
time of" and = the month of Abib. It is a different Hebrew word
used here for "feast"(#2282 not 4150). Obviously the word "moed"
or "moadim" is here used NOT for "feast" as the feast has already
been mentioned as the feast of unleavened bread. It is used here
as a "month season, Abib." It is used as a general expression for
the season of the year that the month of Abib is in. We may say
today "the spring season of Abib."
Notice Lev.23:4. Here the word (#4150) is used TWICE. It would be
a little silly to render this verse as: "These are the feasts of
the Lord ..... which you shall proclaim feasts" as God has made
it plain already they are feasts of His in verse 2. The KJV
translators had the correct meaning of what God was saying here.
The feasts of the Lord were to be holy gatherings, proclaimed to
be observed in their own particular seasons of the year. The Jews
have always known that the Passover/Unleavened Bread feast was to
be observed in the "spring" season not the winter season(from
Palestine). The "fall" feasts (Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles)
was to be in the fall season not the spring(Palestine year).
This Hebrew word (#4150) CAN MEAN a certain time of the year, a
certain period of the year, be it spring, summer, fall etc. It
does NOT JUST mean "feast" or "festival."
It would be wonderful for us keepers of the feasts of the Lord,
to be able to prove 100%, without any doubt, that this word
"moed" in Gen.1:14 means ONLY "feasts" for then we could indeed
say that God had His feasts from the very beginning. BUT.....
such is not the case. No dogmatic stance can be taken on that
view, unless you are going to be very UNwise. We just CANNOT be
sure for certain that Moses was telling us that God had His
festivals from the beginning, or that God simply had the lights
of heaven mark out day, night, signs of various weather to come
(as the farmers used to watch the sky before we had the space age
weather man), for yearly cycles, and for seasons within that
year(spring, fall etc.).. If it is the latter, then God did have
different seasons from the beginning, with weather patterns (but
probably not as wild and contrasting as today in many parts of
the world).
From what I have already said above under other comments, I am
inclined to lean towards the latter understanding of Gen.1:14.
God did have yearly seasons, with seedtime and harvest, cold and
heat, summer and winter, and RAIN as we are familiar with today,
only not as drastic, but much more pleasant for the world of that
age before the flood of Noah.
No rain teaching:
Man had great longevity. There was no seasonal stress of extremes
and changing weather fronts. The sun's shortwave radiation and
cosmic rays were filtered more.
My answer:
The Bible does indicate that man had greater longevity than
today. We do have men mentioned who lived hundreds of years, but
were they the norm or the exceptions? We cannot know for sure,
but I will take the relative few given as examples of the norm
during that time and age. It may also have just been God's will
that mankind live much longer then than today. Just his plan and
desire for that age. As for Dillow's other statements above. I
see no Biblical proof in specifics. I do know the sun's rays are
of benefit for health(vitamin D is produced by the sun's rays)
even today IF we had not put holes in the ozone. I know from
experience that living for months without bright sunny days has a
psychological effect on humans. I lived in a part of B.C. for
three years that often had periods of three to four months of
cloudy sunless weather during the wintery time. Let's face it,
what is better than a warm sunny day with blue skies and a few
snowy white clouds drifting by, while out next to a stream
rolling through a country meadow, with the birds singing and
sheep grazing. The fishermen among us know exactly how lovely
that is.
No rain teaching:
Canopied skies therefore blocked the production of C-14
substantially or totally so such testing for dates for these
worlds (including pre-man ones) is misleading. Radiation is known
to cause aging. A plot of age versus generations displays a
exponential decline curve reminiscent of a change of one set of
conditions to another set of different conditions.
Mt answer:
Again, that is Dillow's thoughts, another scientist may have
other evidence or claims, to counter his. I'll leave all that for
them to argue over.
No rain teaching:
Noah's drunkenness (Genesis 9:20-21) can be attributed to the new
conditions of the new age. Water in a canopy would press down on
the atmosphere below increasing the atmospheric pressure. Dillow
shows that 40 feet of perceptible water in the canopy would
increase pressure to 2.18 atmospheres by the weight. The
chemical reaction changing glucose to alcohol is:
C6 H12 06 ----> 2(C 02) + 2(C2 HS OH)
The carbon dioxide is suppressed with greater atmospheric
pressure so fermentation takes longer.
My answer:
I think Ewin answered all this above. And I can make wine inside
the house, without a canopy of water above, so what on earth has
all this got to do with proving it did not rain until the flood?
No rain teaching:
Noah was caught off guard by the increased alcoholic content and
lower pressure causes intoxication sooner - a double whammy.
My answer:
Whhhaaattt! I see nothing in the Scriptures that says Noah was
caught off guard by anything! It simply says Noah planted a
vineyard and got drunk! Let's leave it at that and not try to
build something out of nothing that is not stated. There are many
people today who plant vineyards, drink of the wine and get
drunk. If they are caught off guard, it is usually by "The
deceitfulness of the human heart" (Jer.17:9).
No rain teaching:
Tests in high altitude found blood alcohol higher than in lower
altitude. So another piece of seemingly unrelated biblical data
dovetails into the water heaven theory. No wonder there is no
record of God chastising Noah for drunkenness and cursing Ham.
My answer:
Just a minute, where in the Scripture does it tell us at what
altitude or even what area of land Noah was living at this time
when he planted a vineyard and became drunk?
Genesis is not a record of EVERYTHING that went on. God may have
chastised Noah for all we know. He was not perfect or without
sin, for as it is written: "all have sinned and come short of the
glory of God." Only Christ Jesus never sinned.
No rain teaching:
Yes, it was Ham who violated Noah, but Ham's son born about the
time of the inebriation was cursed, as the plain reading of the
account states and "Ham father of Canaan" is twice stated
(9:18,22). God also knows there is a psychological letdown after
catastrophic stress as with Lot, Elijah and Hezekiah.
My answer:
The Scripture does NOT say it was Ham who violated Noah. The word
"violate" is not found in the text with regards to Ham. He, Ham,
SAW and TOLD (verse 22). That is all it says, no more and no
less. And what has that got to do with "a canopy, no rain before
Noah" idea? It sure did rain BEFORE all this with Noah took
place, for 40 days and 40 nights at least (chap.7).
No rain teaching:
Psalm 148 has caused scepticism, it nevertheless bolsters the
water heaven idea. It naturally falls into two segments of praise
in the heavens (1-6) and praise from the earth (7-14). The waters
above the heavens (4) is in the heaven section and of course is
above the heavens. Hail, snow, vapors, clouds and wind are
related to the earth. By poetic license, waters above are
addressed though nonexistent at the time of the psalmist.
My answer:
This psalm is written at the time of the person writing it. They
were seeing things are they knew they existed THEN AT THAT TIME
while they wrote. Look at it, is there anything there that does
not exist even today? Can we not say and sing this psalm today
with the same intent as the person who wrote it when they wrote
it? I think so! I had read this psalm as a young boy. What did
the words "Praise Him..... you waters above the heavens" mean to
me. Why just another way of saying the waters above, that would
sooner or later come down to earth as rain. Poetic
personification of the water above that floats around the earth
to become clouds and rain to fall on the earth at times. Waters
above were every bit in existence in the psalimist's day as they
are in our day.
No rain teaching:
The waters were first separated vertically (Genesis 1:6-8) and
the top water was placed above, not within, the firmament called
heaven.
My answer:
Come on now, what God is telling us in Gen.1:6-8 is that instead
of a dark complete soup like surface of the earth that extending
above the water covering the earth for who knows how high. So
thick and black that first of all He had to begin to thin it out
so day and night could be started to be distinguished(verses
2-5). Then divided the waters even more by having waters below
and waters above with an expanse between, that we could say in
comparison was waterless. God calling this expanse between
"heaven." The heaven where the birds generally fly. This is the
overall heaven, first heaven, but does this heaven continue
above? It could be argued it does. The waters in the clouds on
the western prairies can be very low at times to the earth's
surface, then again the waters in the clouds above mount Everest
is so high man would die for lack of air if we could stay up
there with them.
God is speaking here in GENERAL terms, not in strict scientific
technical terms. We today generally call the expanse between us
on the earth and the waters in the clouds above "heaven" - the
heaven where the birds fly. That heaven can be of various
distances at various times between the waters below and the
waters above, but we still call it heaven, so does God.
No rain teaching:
Moses had six words for clouds and several for vapor, yet
employed plain water as his word of choice.
My answer:
Yes because he was telling us how God was dividing this thick
dark soup like water covering the earth, so thick and dark that
even day and night could not be noticed if you had been down on
the surface of the water covering the earth in a boat. The
context is all this WATER and darkness which God was beginning to
move. He did not completely fashion it all until the 4th day,
when clear lights from the second heaven could shine upon the
earth. On the 4th day we had the sky (with clouds etc.) as we
know it today, as I read it. But in the earlier verses WATER is
the subject not clouds or vapor. His choice of word was VERY
FITTING for the context.
No rain teaching:
The great lights which Moses recorded must be different than the
sun and moon, for why would he not mention them in the book of
beginnings when he wrote of stars? He wanted to portray something
unique from his experience and ours. Using the generic term of
lights with one of greater intensity than the other, connotes the
impression of a general and vast region of the sky which was
Illuminated without any distinct form as the circular sun and
moon afford in a clear sky. A canopy occluding or veiling the sun
would account for the greater light on the sunward side, while
casting diffused light to the other side of the earth for the
lesser light.
My answer:
That is your theory. I do not read these verses of chapter one
anywhere near as to how you want us to read them. Even from my
youth as a child reading these verses I never came up with an
idea as you portray to us. I saw and still do, that day and
night, light and darkness, has generally speaking once more,
light that rules each. The light of the day is not the light of
the night. The light of the light is not the light of the
darkness. Pretty simple to me, even when I was a child. And what
gives us on this earth the two different lights, one to rule the
day and one to rule the night? Why the heavenly bodies of the
sun, moon, and stars. The stars are specifically mentioned (verse
16). So the sun, and moon are not mentioned by the names we know
them as today. Big deal, from the very words and context I
understood Moses to mean those two heavenly bodies. Even as a
child I understood it that way. Does this light still come to
earth today that divides the day from the night and light from
darkness? Yes it does! From where does it come? From the heavenly
bodies of the sun, moon, and stars. As it is today so it was then
when God reformed and divided the waters of blackness from off
the earth, to form the sky, land and sea, ready for living
creatures in whom would be the breath of life. Ready also for
those who would be made after His image - mankind.
Oh, the Hebrew for "made" and "set them" (verses 16,17) are in
the past tense. Should have been rendered as "And God HAD
made...." - "And God HAD set them....." The sun, moon, stars, had
already been made and created long before what was now taking
place in verses 14-19. God was now organizing the sky so the
lights from these heavenly bodies could shine fully and
clearly upon the earth (generally speaking that is, when
clouds were not in the way, but even then we still have a
difference between day and night).
No rain teaching:
Again, Moses was conveying new concepts in terms of already known
phenomena and surely would have used the terms sun and moon if
they were appropriate.
My answer:
Not so, they were already in existence. His readers would have
already been quite familiar with the two great lights that gave
light on the earth to divide day from night. They would have
easily understood what two great lights he was speaking about. I
did as a child reading these verses.
..................
No RAIN before Noah's life? #3To sum it all up!Continuing and finishing the debate on "No RAIN before Noah's
life."
No rain teaching:
The great lights which Moses recorded must be different than the
sun and moon, for why would he not mention them in the book of
beginnings when he wrote of stars? He wanted to portray something
unique from his experience and ours. Using the generic term of
lights with one of greater intensity than the other, connotes the
impression of a general and vast region of the sky which as
illuminated without any distinct form as the circular sun and
moon afford in a clear sky. A canopy occluding or veiling the sky
account for the greater light on the sunward side, while casting
diffused light to the other side of earth for the lesser light.
Someone will bring up Psalm 136:7-9 to refute this
idea. However, the psalmist could merely be expressing what was
normal in his day, his view of what the great lights were. Not
realizing any change in the great lights since they were created.
My answer:
Putting scripture with scripture, letting one interpret the
other, it seems pretty plain to me, that the psalmist understood
Gen 1:14-19 as I when a child understood it.
No rain teaching:
While the sun could have been the greater light to rule the day
(it defining a day), the lesser light was to rule the night.
My answer:
I think a child would see it that way.
No rain teaching:
This would apply better to the canopy diffused back lighting than
the moon which only rules the night about half the time. The
other half is when it appears in daytime and is ruled over by the
sun. The lesser light with canopy would always be present over
half the earth.
My answer:
Sorry but no canopy idea came to my mind as a child reading those
verses. If you and people like Dillow had never preached the
idea, I sure would not get it from Genesis or any other book of
the Bible.
So in summing my position up to the idea that no rain came on
earth until the lifetime of Noah.
The earth in Genesis one was covered by water. There was a global
food on the earth, not at Noah's time, but here in the fist
verses of Genesis. We come on the scene when the earth was
entirely covered with water. God then sets about to create what
Genesis one is telling us about. The sea and land appear. There
is still great darkness around the earth. The sun and moon and
stars HAD BEEN created, they were already there, but their light
could not be seen from earth. God had to now move the waters
(thick mist like water darkness) above and below (that were all
around the earth) and create the heaven above our earth as we
basically know it today. Hence Genesis 1:14 has really nothing to
do with "festivals" but is correct to translate the Hebrew as the
scholars of the KJV Bible did. God was now forming all the
physical around planet earth, for the days, nights, and for the
yearly seasons. The sky and clouds as we know them today were
there being formed, the sun and moon and stars could now be seen
and give their respected light to the earth.
The plants and trees etc. were created full grown, especially in
the garden of Eden, and ONLY UNTIL man was created and instructed
in care-giving to the garden, and the clouds and all that is
needed to cycle around to bring rain, ONLY UNTIL that natural
cycle functioned in its full circle, did God water everything
with a mist or dew type of water.
After man was instructed in how to care for the garden he and his
wife were living in. After the evaporation of waters from the sea
of the world, and the forming of clouds and all that is needed to
bring rain on the earth, IT DID RAIN!
That is how I have understood Genesis 1 and 2 from a young child
reading those chapter. And with all the arguments by some to the
contrary, that is how I understand those Genesis chapters to this
day. There was no rain for only a relatively very short period.
When the cycle of earth and heaven moved in its cycle, then good
rain fell on the earth. AND THAT WAS WAY BEFORE NOAH LIVED!!
....................
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment