Questions keep on arising. But what about this scripture and what about that scripture. Initially I planned this article to step through scriptures relevant to the Day-8 View introduced in Chapter 12 of Page-1-God. I wanted to present them in the same sequence as they occurred in the Bible. But as the the Game Start articles grew, so did this article, and the detail here grew into articles of their own. So this article no longer reads well, but I need to leave it because I have referred to this article in other places. I recommend reading Page-1-God, and Created Mortal first.
My original introduction had some warm fuzzy assertions as follows...
When I observe seeming inconstancies in Scriptures I dont assume that Scripture is wrong but instead look in more detail. Sometimes they are not so much inconsistent as showing a different perspective. At other times they are screaming out to for someone to see the mystery hidden there. Its crying out for an interpretation. Perhaps my interpretation is different to yours but before adopting and adversarial mentality, just try and see the overwhelming confirmation. Also look for the fruit a fruit that focuses us on Jesus and Gods time-table.
That was OK but it is really just rubbish. Firstly, if it really was me seeking out these mysteries and new perspectives, this site would never have been established. I know how simplistic my initial writings were. But after I wrote what I knew, I feel that God then started to open my eyes to the new and radical things. Second, there is no grace if you are trying to pervert the word of God. My suggestions go contrary to long held understandings. They must be challenged and tested. Apparent fruit or good intentions does not cut it! So feel free to go for it, but after reading all the information on this site, if I have been able to answer all concerns and have a Biblically consistent view that gives glory to God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, then you cannot dismiss my insights.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...
In June 2009 I heard that the heavens and the earth is just a turn of phrase, an idiom, meant here to imply everything. I agree this makes sense. I find it used in many ways like this, for example Luke 10:21 talks about God as Lord of heaven and earth to imply sovereignty over everything. Indeed in the following verses everything in this universe is then described as being created including the actual earth, and the first heaven, (the sky), and the second heaven, (the sun, the moon and stars). But it does not describe the third heaven, the abode of God, commonly just called heaven. It does not describe the creation of the sea or of Sheol (Psalm 16:10), the place where the dead descend. Other scriptures like Revelation 5:13 that refer to every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, really do cover everything.
This confirms to me that God was taking about the creation of everything in the natural (material) universe in Genesis 1. It excludes Gods heaven and Sheol, the spiritual realms. This is helpful to recall when I later suggest that day-6 man was created devoid of a spirit, while day-8 man, Adam, in the second creation account starting in Genesis 2:4, was given a spirit. Indeed the Genesis 2 description of the creation of the heavens and the earth just talks about a man from the dust of the earth plus the breath (spirit) of God. This is how God brings heaven and earth together.
In Chapter 23, of Page-1-God I have discussed how “The starting point ” was a reflection of Gods heart. His plan is consummated with the creation of Adam and Eve. It then takes on its fullness when heaven and earth come together again in the New Heaven and the New Earth, where God and man are again together.
What does man made in the image of God, mean as compared to Adam who was the likeness of God and whose life came from the breath or spirit of God. This also deals with the misunderstanding of good and perfect. See the “On day 8” section of Page-1-God, and Created Mortal.
The last part of this verse says male and female he created them. Though fish, birds and animals are clearly male and female, only here, for the man-kind, is the male and female attribute specified. I do discuss the sexuality of day-6 and day-8 man later in this article, especially under Genesis 6:2. I wish I could give a definitive reason. Its probably because we see God as masculine and since man reflects this image, God wanted to specifically clarify that both the male and female of the species were in His image? (Sadly the male ego/arrogance has used his physical strength not to subdue the earth as much as subdue women.) This really is irrelevant to the day-6/8 debate except that again we see Eve described as a partner, not less important than Adam, but simply with a different role to play. Ultimately, I see present day man as a mixture of the genes of day-6 and day-8 man and its good to know that in both, God gave equal value to the male and the female.
The definition man as both male and female is consistent with many scriptures that refer to us as both sons and daughters of God (2 Corinthians 6:18 , Joel 2:28-29).
This has a lot hidden in it. See the Seed and Fruit article.
A lot hangs on this verse. In Chapter 12 “Introducing day-8 man”, of Page-1-God, I have shown that the whole purpose in creation of heaven and earth is about to be fulfilled. This is the event that shakes heaven and earth when God creates Adam. But what about the bit in Genesis 2:5-6 that basically says,
There were no plants or grain growing on the earth, for the Lord God had not sent any rain. And no man was there to cultivate the soil. But water came up out of the ground and watered all the land. (paraphrased)
In the preceding verse, Genesis 2:4, God has declared that He is now giving an account of the creation of the heavens and the earth and then he paints this picture of unusual agricultural and atmospheric conditions. Its unusual to me because Day 2 established the waters above, and Day 3 established vegetation. But read on and you will see that I think these verses are all saying the same thing, that there was no man suitable to receive and pass on His word and His Spirit. And surprise, surprise, in the very next verse, 7, God creates that man, Adam.
In Deuteronomy 32:2 Moses likens his teaching to rain:
Let my teaching drop as the rain, My speech distill as the dew, As the droplets on the fresh grass And as the showers on the herb.
Even more so in Isaiah 55:10-11. Several of Jesus parables liken the Word of God to seed. If there is no man to cultivate the soil then there is no man to spread the seed. So the absence of rain and no man to cultivate are saying the same thing, namely, that there was no man with a spirit to receive the Word of God, personified in Jesus. Wow, its just saying there is not yet a bride for Jesus.
Ezekiel 47:1 talks about a river flowing from the temple, suggestive of the mercy seat of God. This river also brings life wherever it flowed. So the absence of rain indicates an absence of life. Yet clearly life as fish, birds an animal already existed. But now He is about to create Adam who became a living being (Genesis 2:7-10 ) and later Eve becomes the mother of the living in Genesis 3:20.
Did you notice that the river appears immediately after Adam is created even though there was no mention of rain. It was symbolic of the life that would flow through Adam. Also, the Garden is planted in the east or eastward in Genesis 2:8 and so the river is flowing east out of Eden in Genesis 2:10. This river flows east, the same as the river in Ezekiel 47:1. Am I going too far if I notice that the house is facing east in Ezekiel, but the water comes from the right side of the house, just as blood and water flowed from Jesus side (John 19:34).
There is more exciting follow-up in the “No plants” appendix of Page-1-God.
Note that God planted the garden. He did not create the garden but He used what was already there. Planting is a careful hands-on exercise totally different from the Let there be. style of Genesis 1. Just another confirmation that this is happening after Genesis 1. Some translations (NIV) say had planted. This is verb tense is discussed more in the following Genesis 2:19 discussion.
Here we see several rivers with specific geographic regions. There are natural and a symbolic implications.
No suggestion that these welled up from the ground, so it was raining somewhere. But if you want to think these were all fed by underground springs and there was still no rain until the flood then I wont argue with you. Or perhaps you like the idea that its snowing on distant mountains and the snow is melting so technically there is no rain. In New Zealand Ive see springs that bubble up from the ground and are fed by distant volcanic lakes so there are lots of ways to look at this. But they all seem different to the streams in Genesis 2:6 which is also translated as a mist. So I see this as confirming that there are at least natural water sources as well as these streams or mist. And if these streams are something special then even if they were physical streams, God is using them to point to the interpretation I have offered in the above discussion of Genesis 2:5.
In the natural it is very hard to imagine a river system exactly as described. This is not to suggest that these rivers were not real. But there was something supernatural about their source. This unusual state of a river system, where every detail was chosen by God, points to something greater than the natural. So we should be looking for this and not getting bogged down in the mechanical details of how God made this happen in the natural.
In verse 18 the Lord decides He will make a helper for Adam. Then in verse 19 some translations like NIV say.
Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds...
and then He brought them to Adam. Others like NASB say,
Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird...
This suggests that He created them after Adam. Obviously I favor the interpretation that the animals had already been created in day 6 and that they are now being brought before Adam. I have also read that verbs in Hebrew need to be translated from the context. Context means what you assume everything else is saying and when you see things as I have described then the correct translation is as per NIV.
This again shows that Adam is being given a special honor. God named the angels, the sun, moon and all the stars and the earth. But now Adam names the animals over which he has been given dominion. Also in Genesis 2:20 it says that no suitable helper was found not formed or made or created. This is another subtle suggestion that God is just reviewing the already created animals before He makes a suitable helper, but again, it is Adam who names Eve.
If you still dont like the past tense, had formed then perhaps you still see Adam and Eve in Genesis 2 as just a more detailed account of the creation of man in day 6. If so you have a problem because the animals were clearly created before man in day 6.
The same debate applies to the planted or had planted in Genesis 2:5. Though this proves nothing with any certainty about Adam as a day-6/8 creation, it does exemplify how translators work with assumptions. I wonder if someone more skilled than me in Hebrew, (which is just about everyone), will see even more than I have in the light of this different assumption.
Verse 20 goes on to say that amongst all the birds and animals, no suitable helper for Adam was found. Just think what this is saying. Its saying that apes and dogs and goats and budgies were not suitable as a partner for Adam. Why isnt that all too obvious? Well its so obvious that the verse is not needed unless amongst all these animals were the day-6 ordinary men and women. Men and women that looked like Adam but were not suitable for some reason. The reason is that they had no spirit! Can you see how this part of the verse suddenly has meaning if day-6 man existed and then later the new creation day-8 man Adam, the son of God appeared.
Some issues relating to marriage and suitable partners...
We notice that Israelites were only to marry Israelites. Then children of the promise that God made to Abraham and fulfilled through Isaac. They became His chosen race, a holy nation, amongst all the other nations and descendants of Adam and they were only to marry within Israel. (By the way, there are some amazing exceptions to this rule, namely Ruth in Ruth 4:10 and Rahab in Joshua 6 and Matthew 1:5, both in Jesus direct lineage. But these were exceptions of women who showed faith which is the all important ingredient!)
Paul makes several assertions related to marriage in 1 Corinthians 7. Now it strongly affirms that married couples must not be divorced, but in verse 15, if the husband or wife is an unbeliever and does not wish to stay married then Paul declares they are not bound. In verse 39 it says that a widow may remarry but only in the Lord.
The key here is in 1 Corinthians 7:17, But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Its really in many places where fellowship in the spirit is discussed. So Adam needed a partner or wife of the same spirit as him. There were none because the ordinary women, daughters of ordinary day-6 man, had no spirit! This is continued reinforcement of my premise that sees Adam created after God rested while ordinary man was created on day 6.
This theme is also the key to understanding the sons of God and daughter of men in Genesis 6. I do discuss this issue elsewhere but Ill add a little more here. The explanations that try and map sons of God to angels are hopelessly flawed because Hebrews 1:5 implies that no angel has ever been granted son of God status. I have found no better solution than mine. But in Genesis 6:3 the LORD said, My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh.... I had read this many times and thought that the my spirit referred to the Holy Spirit of God, but it now seems possible to me that God is referring to His spirit that He breathed into Adam. So this verse is not just constraining the life span of Adams descendants but also suggests that the fullness of Gods spirit will no longer be with these men that are now considered but flesh, that is carnal. Certainly we see in the rest of the Old Testament that only a few selected individuals, leaders and prophets had Gods Spirit poured out on them.
I dont know if you can see it from these few words, but I see a picture of God giving His Spirit to one man and his descendants but they turn away from the spirit to the flesh. Its a recurring theme from then on.
The Lord takes one of Adams ribs and clones Eve from it. Of course He makes some pretty fantastic adjustments. This is all about forming Eve from Adams DNA. DNA is a complex spiral molecule that dictates what we look like. If you asked an Old Testament person what dictates your shape, he would say that your skeleton dictates you shape and size. What part of the skeleton is most indicative of a spiral? The ribs.
Do you recall how Jesus was pierced in the side after he died on the cross, probably just below his ribs. Death is likened to falling asleep in the New Testament. So Jesus falls asleep and the blood and water poured forth from His side for the cleansing and purification of His bride. The prophetic comparisons of the events in Genesis 1 and 2 are covered more in other articles like the Summary Model and Page-1-God.
From Adam onwards, God always works through one man Adam, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, David, Jesus. He also establishes a lineage through Aaron. In Genesis 2 He is doing the same thing. Adam already exists and He works through Adam even to create Eve. But what I have just described is (arguably) dramatically different to simply being created male and female.
Now if you think Im being too spiritual or doing too much hand waving and not constraining myself to the plain text, I wonder how you handle the talking snake. Did any other animals talk? This is clearly Satan. Even the New Testament refers to Satan as that ancient serpent (Revelation 12:9). So dont give me a hard time about what I suggest. Could Satan have entered into this animal causing it to talk and deceive Eve? Yes, but why punish the animal for what Satan did? The judgment against the snake must then also be referring to Satan and so must be symbolic because we dont see Satan crawling on his belly eating dust. But we do see Satan cast out of heaven and constrained to this earth until the end times. We see Satan is preying on man who is but dust of the earth. The snake is not written into the text of Genesis like a parable its written in literally (plainly). But its role becomes clear when interpreted as you would a parable. So we should at least be tolerant of, even expectant that, key meanings of other passages will be found in symbolic interpretations, all be it requiring some discernment so that you dont lose the plot!
This describes Eve as the the mother of all the living. Surely she is not mother of fish and birds and animals. So the living here must be referring to our life-giving spirit that God breathed into Adam and is passed on to all their descendants. So we see life as life that comes through the spirit and this reinforces the idea that when God is talking about death, its not natural death of the body, but the second death where we are judged and our eternal life is condemned to the lake of fire. (Well, not my life because I belong to Jesus.)
Here Eve declares that her first son, Cain, is man God. This is a dilemma for translators but easily understood with day-6 and day-8 man. See The Man-God Dilemma in Chapter 13 of Page-1-God.
This scripture is explored in the Image versus Likeness section in Chapter 13 of Page-1-God. But in brief, we see Adam created here as the likeness of God as different from day-6 man in Genesis 1:27, who was just created as the image of God. This is very significant, not just a word play!
Here the sons of God take wives from amongst the daughters of men. I have talked about this in other places as a reason for distinguishing day-6 man and day-8 man. But a friend asked me, Why would God create day-6 man such that Adams descendants could interbreed with them, if that was such a reprehensible act to Him? Its a good question. Here are some issues...
For now, since I have introduced day-6 and day-8 man, I will field this question.
First we observe that God created animals in kinds with multiple species within the different kinds. So day-6 man and day-8 are the same man-kind but different species. So this is simply the way God works. Lets look at some examples in the cat family. There are lions, tigers, right down to the domestic cat. I think that Adam would have been as far above day-6 man in majesty as the visual appearance of the tiger is above that of your pet cat! These different cat species dont naturally interbreed but in some situations where lions and tigers have been kept in the same caged area this has been observed but usually the offspring are sterile. So interbreeding between day-6 man and day-8 man was not natural, meaning not God planned.
In several places in Jeremiah, e.g. 32:35, the people of Israel are described to have sacrificed their sons and daughters to Molech and God says though I did not command them, nor did it enter my mind that they should do this abomination. So though God knows the end from the beginning, He also has a capacity not to conceive that man would ever do some of the abominations that man has done. Without such a paradox in Gods nature He would never have created man in the first place bearing in mind His assertion in Genesis 6:6 that He was sorry He created man. Why does God do things or create things that later displease, grieve and anger Him? Because He loves us and can see past it all to those that are reconciled to Him through Jesus Christ.
There is another thing about this passage. The sons of God seemed to take multiple wives from amongst the daughters of men. But God had just shown them the model of how they were to live through Adam and Eve. There is just one partner for each man. Jesus himself re-asserted this in Matthew 19:4-6.
God can handle, by which I mean cover by His grace, a lot of things. In Jesus own lineage there were two non-Israelite women clearly mentioned in Matthew 1:5 , Rahab and Ruth, and also described in detail in the Old Testament writings, yet the Israelites were not to take wives from amongst foreigners. Both these women, though foreigners, were noted for their faithfulness and support or choice of Israel against their own people. I also expect that God was able to cover Cains choice of wife from amongst the day-6 men because Cain had only one wife. (This is not to deny the alternative suggestion that Cains wife was his sister.)
In other places I show how God was setting up Adam to be like Jesus was in heaven. Day-6 man is to Adam as the angels in heaven are to Jesus. Jesus is glorified above all the angels (see Hebrews 1) who are servants yet visually Jesus and the angels look like us, man, though more majestic from all accounts.
So day-6 man looked similar to Adam and without giving a thought to the horrid things Adams descendants would do, God gave them compatible DNA from the same kind.
Though I use the word compatible, I believe Adams DNA was far superior, giving him and his descendants not just longer life than day-6 men but also immunity to diseases. So this interbreeding probably introduced all manner of corruption including the reduction in age. Other side effects, like the Nephilim (giants), are described from this merging of DNA. I discuss this in more detail in Chapter 20, “About the Nephilim”, of Page-1-God, where there large stature is simply explained.
The apostle Paul described that sexual sin was the worst because its effect was inside your own body (1 Corinthians 6:16-18), confirming how this wrong interbreeding could have had such powerful side-effects.
Here God says that He was grieved He made man on the earth. I had always wondered why God was sorry to have created Adam. It seemed contrary to all of scripture. Then I suddenly realised it. The man here is day-6 man not Adam and his lineage. God was sorry He created the servant class of day-6 man, now that it had this terrible consequence for Adams lineage. He was grieving over the suffering that Adams descendants had brought on themselves. (Notice that day-6 man is not saved from the flood in the arc. Mankind is represented only by Noah and his sons and wives.)
This might seem like a subtle twisting of words to you but to me it is tremendously important. If I am not perfect, and I am not, He will never be sorry that He has made me His own!
This refers to all creatures that have the breath of life. But this breath of life did not come from God. Here, breath of life is simply referring to creatures that breath air as different from fish that did not need to be saved from the flood. This is not a suggestion that animals have a spirit.
This article casts a different light on the post flood scene.
This chapter is dealing with wisdom, but in verses 12-36 the author suddenly talks as wisdom personified, I, wisdom.. In no time at all we see that it is really Jesus that is talking. In verses 22 to 31 it is talking about creation. Jesus was with the Father from the beginning. Some verses talk about the events of the earth in day 3 and others about the heavens and sky in day 2.
I find no inconsistency with this and either the Literal, World or Universe Models. Verse 30 talks about Jesus daily delighting in the Fathers creation. So Jesus is delighting in each stage of creation. (I think He knew what His dad was getting ready to do!) No need to demand literal days from this. I like how verse 26 talks about the earth and fields and dust of the world, which links to Genesis 2:5-7. But what I really like is verse 31, at the end of this creation section, where Jesus delights in mankind. Can you see here how mankind is the fulfilment of creation; to provide a bride for Jesus? If you have not already done so, read The Angels perspective.
He answered, Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.
So the beginning Jesus is talking about is Adam and Eve, in Genesis 2, not just Genesis 1. Indeed Genesis 2:5 is like another introduction, as it is, to the creation of Adam. They are both portrayed as the beginning. Jesus does not differentiate these two beginnings because Genesis 1 is the preface that sets the scene for what God is going to do in Genesis 2. Its only our technical (and possibly flawed) insight that inserts significant time between these two chapters. Dont let that confuse the issue. This is not a proof of the Literal Model; its just showing Gods perspective; that the creation of all things was completed, even consummated, in the union of Adam and Eve. It is this union that is the beginning of Gods purposes unfolding. The physical creation of the universe is a prelude to what begins with Adam and Eve.
19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God.
20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope
21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.
OK, creation is in a state of futility and decay waiting for the sons of God to be revealed. That’s what it says. Now let’s look at what we read into it...
Some people assume that this futility and corruption (decay in NRSV) set in with the curses in Genesis 3. This view usually starts with the assumption that everything was perfect, (not merely very good), at the end of day 6 and that is where it all went wrong.
I simply assume that this is a picture of how God created things at the end of day 6, waiting for Adam to be revealed on day 8. Adam had access to the tree of life but never ate of it. Rather Adam stuffed up and creation is still waiting for the sons of God to be revealed. (I think that will happen when Jesus returns.)
Still a few others suggest that creation here was not created things but something else. I cant recall what it was. I look out the window and see an awesome creation subject to decay and Im confident this is what Paul was describing.
I dont like debating this scripture in its application to Genesis because Pauls goal is to direct his readers from the blindingly evident corrupted state of what they we see today to the future glory that will be revealed through those who believe. Personally, I hope that we will see a glimpse of the future glory in a mighty revival that will soon come.
It’s Sep 09 as I write, a year or two since most other sections. My desire to debate and justify my ideas from scripture seems to have evaporated. More, I can see that people will choose an option based on rules and assumptions they have made and no amount of debate will change that. So you can choose. I am starting an article about Rules and Assumptions but right now there is more than I can get down in a readable fashion so I dont know when it will come out.
Romans 5:12-19, 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, and 1 Corinthians 15:45-47 are key scriptures talking about this and can be misinterpreted to deny day-6 man. I have discussed this in Chapter 17 of Page-1-God.
Someone might say that I got the mistaken notion that Adam was created after ordinary men and then simply made up all these interpretations of Scripture to fit this idea. The key to this criticism is that it is mostly true. Although the Game Start articles do contain other revelations, it is fair to say that this is a key point. But such a criticism actually underlines the very nature of revelation which is that some inspired understanding suddenly enables you to see things in a whole new light.
When the apostle Paul fell off his horse and was blinded by the light of Jesus he realised that Jesus was Lord and within a few days was proving to the Jews from Scripture that Jesus was the Messiah. Pauls entire understanding of the Old Testament was re-interpreted by this revelation. Paul could see that it was all pointing to Jesus, which is another discerning point about revelation. I dont set my articles on the same level as Pauls but you get the idea. Its the very fact that so much can be opened by the concept of Adam came after ordinary men idea that reinforces it as revelation.
Do you want to know the really scary bit? The key notion is not about ordinary men and Adam. That simply follows from the understanding that Genesis 2 follows Genesis 1. This means that Adams creation followed the men created on day 6. So why do I call this scary? Because this notion is astoundingly simple and exactly what is written. I dont say this to insult saints and even martyrs and men of the faith who have preceded me and are more worthy of your honour than me, but because if this is true, then you have to ask why it hasnt been in main stream teaching long ago! And the answer to that question is because God is choosing now to reveal this mystery, hidden for ages past, to focus His church on His timetable. This timetable has a beginning and an end. The beginning is not day 1, but the first children of God and bride of Christ, Adam and Eve. The end will be soon when Jesus returns for His bride. Amen hallelujah!
By the way, when I say scary, please dont quote to me that perfect love casts out all fear. Rather the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. I am in awe of God and seriously tremble when I think that the things we have long waited for are now unfolding. I could be (will be) in the generation that sees the return of Christ. With what other heart attitude should you handle all the parables that warn us not to be caught sleeping, but to be alert waiting for the Masters return. How else can you handle the warnings to the church in Revelation 2 and 3.
The good thing about God is that there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9), so somewhere I have not read someone else is bound to have suggested these things. Perhaps they will be the one acknowledged and my oracle will simply be confirmation.