Creation

The reason for this difference is that there are two quite different creation stories in Genesis, written by two different authors. The first creation story is Genesis 1:1-24a (the first sentence of 2:4) and is believed to have been written by a source now known as the Priestly source. The second is in Genesis 2:4b-2:25 and is believed to have been written by a source now known as the Yahwist source. The creation of man and woman is, of course, not the only difference that scholars note between the two accounts.

For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation

Well, it really depends on what you think because there is no proof that shows God is real but, who created the stars? This is really a question that can't be answered because it has to do with ones beliefs. Science shows that stars did create the Earth because of the Big Bang theory and that the Sun helped create life. So this is something to ask you and your beliefs. Most Christians believe that it's God's creation but, science has proven otherwise. So sorry- this question may never have a exact answer.

Another Answer:

The Scripture clearly states all was created by God through His Word:

The Word Became Flesh1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Taken together, Science theories like the Big Bang model, the laws of thermodynamics, the laws of biogenesis all suggest the universe had a beginning and that life could only come from life and not inanimate objects. Hence science is in harmony with Genesis 1:1

In the United States, most people educated up to High School graduation or less, believe in creation in preference to evolution. In the rest of the Western world, the overwhelming majority of all people believe in the Theory of Evolution.

In 1996, the National Science Board put the question, "Believe that humans as we know them today evolved from earlier species of animals" as part of a survey of Science and Engineering Indicators for the United States. The proportions of people who replied 'Yes', by education level:

• Graduate/professional over 70%
• Baccalaureate about 60%
• H.S. graduate about 41%
• Less than H.S. about 29%

The Data360 organisation provides more recent statistics for the population as a whole, in the United States and selected other countries, who believe in evolution:

USA ........ 39.7%

Britain .... 73.4%

France ... 79.5%

Denmark 82.2%

Adam and Eve were the ones created and there are two separate accounts of the same event.

ANOTHER ANSWER:

This is only my understanding of the scripture through using the Strong's Concordance of the KJVB, the King James Bible and the Jewish Bible the Tanakh.

I understand that there were 2 creations of man on two different days. One on the 6th day and another on the 8th day, after the Sabbath.

The Numbers 7 & 8 are sacred to the Jews,

In kabalistic teachings, the number seven symbolizes perfection - perfection that is achievable via natural means - while eight symbolizes that which is beyond nature and its (inherently limited) perfection.

Genesis 1:26-28 The Gentiles/Nations/ other races of peoples

1st man "adam" was created through a command GOD gave to the earth, both male and female, came forth from the ground. FYI (adam is the Hebrew word for man, mankind, human beings, etc. The word "man" was a bad English translation in this verse. A better translation would have been mankind. or humans.)

Genesis 2:5b-7 Adam and Eve are a creation that is one step above the natural order, higher than nature and its limitations, a "saving" people.

2nd the man "haadam" and was formed by the hands of GOD and not by a command given to the earth. FYI (haadam is the Hebrew word for "the man", and I believe this "special" man has a special purpose. Because through him, whom we call Adam, the Messiah would be born thousands of years later.

(Adam - Noah - David - Jesus)

# 120 'ā·ḏām אָדָ֛ם man

# 120 hā·'ā·ḏām, הָֽאָדָ֗ם the man

# 127 hā·'ă·ḏā·māh, הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה the ground

*Notice the each of these words contain the word "adam".

According to the NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, these are the meanings of "adam".

- "any man , anyone, anyone's, being, common sort, human, infantry, low degree, low, man, man's, man, mankind, men, men of low degree, men's, men, mortal, one, people, person, person, persons, population, someone"

How accurate is the Jewish Bible?

Jeremiah is the first to mention the scribes as a professional group: "How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us? Lo, certainly in vain make he it; the pen of the scribes (sopherim) is in vain" (Jer.8:8).

The word sopherim literally means "the counters"; the early scribes earned this title because they counted every letter of every book of Scripture to make sure they didn't leave out anything.

After the Jews returned from Exile, they formed communities of scribes to preserve and circulate the Scriptures that had become so precious to them. These scribes tried to explain the variations in different manuscripts. They eventually developed a system of vowel pointing that preserved the pronunciation of the Hebrew words.

Before he began his work each day, the scribe would test his reed pen by dipping it in ink and writing the name Amalek, then crossing it out (Deut. 25:19). Then he would say, "I am writing the Torah in the name of its sanctity and the name of God in its sanctity." The scribe would read a sentence in the manuscript he was copying, repeat it aloud, and then write it. Each time he came to the name of God, he would say, " I am writing the name of God for the holiness of His name." If he made an error in writing God's name, he had to destroy the entire sheet of papyrus or vellum that he was using.

After the scribe finished copying a particular book, he would count all of the words and letters it contained. Then he checked this tally against the count for the manuscript that he was copying. He counted the number of times a particular word occurred in the book, and he noted the middle word and the middle letter in the book, comparing all of these with his original. By making these careful checks, he avoided any errors.

This was done from generation to generation for thousands of years.

Some Fundamentalists do believe in the literal creation account found in the first chapters of Genesis.

Many others see Genesis as falling in the genre of 'theological poetry', they would say that the key to interpreting it is not so much asking:

• did it actually happened that way?
  

• what is it telling us?

• the world, humanity, sex, and work are inherently designed to be good in their original state.
  
• That gender equality is part of the original creation before the fall.
  
• That stewardship of the earth was the primary task given to humanity.
  
• That humanity has inherent dignity and worth, to be respected and valued, as created in the image of God.

Bara is the third person masculine conjugation of the verb 'to create/form/make' in Hebrew. It means [he] created/formed/made.

Bara is what Elohim did in Genesis 1:1. בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃

By and large, bara is the sole prerogative of Elohim. That is to say, Man does not create/form/make in the same sense that Elohim does.

Satan has multiple names I think.

If you wish to learn more than you can visit the website: joyofsatan.com

Destruction paves the way for something new to form out of the ensuing chaos.

It's a way to bring an end to stagnation or an imperfect system, so something young, and with potential for growth, can take its place.

An example would be a political revolution, where a new government inevitably forms out the turmoil, frequently better than the original and more able to adapt to current events.

--------------------------

Fiat lux's answer:

I registered here now to answer your question (:

"Destruction is a form of creation."

While this statement is seemingly rather simple, it contains very deep philosophical thoughts or more precisely very deep thoughts about us, humans, and our understandings.

This statement has various communicative layers, I could compare it to Descarte's "I think therefore I am"; many people think they understand it, because it is also seemingly simple, and this is the biggest obstacle to knowledge: the ego.

Back to the topic: the statement "destruction is a form of creation" represents, that creation and destruction are measured SUBJECTIVELY!

This means that destruction is NOT the opposite of creation, although "main stream" thinking would suggest this.

The statement suggests therefore that destruction IS actually creation, because when something is destroyed, another thing is created from it; and when something is created, another thing was destroyed,

so at a certain destruction\creation event it is possible only upto a subjective layer to decide whether destruction or creation occured.

Nature, which is objective, is indifferent towards destruction and creation, because "she knows" that these terms are completely interchangeable.

Hence destruction is a form of creation!

(sorry for bad English)

Firstly Genesis was never ever meant to be taken literally, and was not taken literally either by the Jews or the early Church (see Origen quote above). Genesis, at least the first chapters, was written as a Hebrew allegorical poem. And a composite one at that. For there are two incompatible Creation stories there in chapters 1 and 2. Creationists who insist on taking Genesis literally either do not know, or conveniently ignore that the Hebrew dictates this allegorical nature. Yes, there is great truth there, of humanity's stupidity, the love of God, its sinful nature and so on, but the literal reading of Genesis loses this truth and replaces it with something that simply does not make sense. As examples:

1. The insistence on six (24hr) days of Creation means that the sun and moon were created after the 'day' - the effect, in other words comes before the cause.
2. Creationists insist that the serpent represents the devil. Yet this is never mentioned - and the concept of Satan as a personification of evil was not even in the Jewish theology when this was written.
3. Creationists insist that Jesus himself believed in Adam and Eve. yet the number of times Jesus actually mentions Adam (or Eve) or Eden - is preciesly zero.
4. If God, as a God of love, did not wish Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, why put it there in the first place? To tempt them? to trip them up? That does not speak of a God of love.

as well as many, many others.

So, taken literally, Genesis is riddled with inconsistencies on which Creationists have built their own theology rather than the theology of the Christian Church as set down by Our Lord himself.

Evolution too is not the complete answer. We know now that some sort of evolution does occur - and is occurring today, but there are still too many unanswered questions about it to presuppose that Darwin was totally correct. There are many events within evolution (why sudden blossoming of species? why no missing links between some clearly different species etc) that mean that we still, despite what Richard Dawkins says about Darwin, do not have anywhere near the complete answer.

However, there is a middle ground, which most Christians follow. Whilst accepting evolution wholeheartedly, I must disagree with the above answer which states that evolution does not need a creator. It certainly does. Back at the moment of Creation (or the 'Big Bang' if you prefer) the laws of nature were set down in the first microseconds of the expanding universe to enable the universe itself to evolve as it has done today. The so-called Anthropic Principle, which has caused quite a stir in scientific circles recently, dictates that the most fundamental constants of the universe are so fine tuned so that stars and planets can exist. The slightest fluctuations either way would mean that the universe as we now it, and especially the stars - which provide all heavier elements necessary for life - would not exist. You can possibly count on coincidence for a couple of these constants to be 'just right' but coincidence goes out of the window when one considers that there are over a hundred fundamental constants that are finely tuned in order that life should exist. One slight fluctuation of a fraction of one percent in any of them would mean that life could not evolve, anywhere. The eminent particle physicist Professor Russel Stannard once said "the universe has bent over backwards in order that intelligent life should exist...the universe must have known we were coming". The Anthropic Principle has become evidence for design within the universe, and the most fundamental and profound design at that.

So yes, it is possible to believe in evolution and Creation. But not the cut-and-dried definitive evolution of Richard Dawkins. Nor in the literal interpretation of a Hebrew poem. Thinking Christians and those who are more devoted to following Christ and his teaching rather than worship a book do just that - every day.

No, it does not mean that.

God created the universe and all creatures and God allowed the evolution of these creatures; by God's will; to adapt themselves with the surrounding nature. One should believe that God is responsible for both Creation and evolution.

Answer:

No, it does not mean that.

What it does mean is that gods are not required to explain life's diversity.

That would be the fourth day. The fourth day was when God created the sun and the moon. He also created the stars, which includes all astronomical bodies.

Source: Genesis 1:14-19

Answer:

Sometime way before Genesis 1. Contrary to the majority who read Genesis, it is not speaking of the initial Creation when the angels shouted with joy (Job 38:7). The earth was already there but in darkness, under water and God renewed the planet and brought forth physical life as we currently know it(Psalm 104:30).

A careful study of Genesis 1 would tell the reader that all was 'created' way before the Earth was renewed. There is a difference of Hebrew words translated as 'created' and 'made' in Genesis 1. Verse 1 says, "In the beginning God 'created' the heavens and the earth (the Big Bang of Science). The term for created in Hebrew is 'bara' which is only used for a divine creation - making something out of nothing or had no existence prior to this time. So when God created the heavens (atmosphere on Earth and the Universe) it included the Sun, moon, planets, stars, etc. And this is why there was light that was divided into day and night on the very 1st day.

The Hebrew word for 'made' in verse 16 is 'asah' and generally means to make or reconstitute something that has already existed. So God more accurately 'fixed' the objects of space into their proper places on the 4th day. These were set to divide night from day, for signs of seasons - days, months, and years (not the 'week' as God defined the Week in Creation and gave mankind the Sabbath rest to recall this great and wonderful work for all generations).

The reader can now see the emphasis in Genesis 1:14-16 in not on the creation of something from nothing but on establishing the purposes for these wonderful and great lights in the heavens (space). Placing the Sun, moon, etc in their proper orbits setting the astronomical standards for the calendar and allowing man to measure the days, months, and years (again this excludes the Week given to man).