• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:18] The Emphasis of Genesis Chapter One

Overitall

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
39,563
Reaction score
28,842
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
For years I’ve seen people focus on the creation of God whenever discussing Genesis chapter one. It’s been my humble opinion that the true emphasis of the first chapter of the Bible has been missed. The springboard for my viewpoint rests upon the foundation of two points. The first being Romans 1:25.

NIV: They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

The second point being the significance of figures of speech found in the Bible. Genesis chapter one being a treasure trove of them, but there is one that stands out throughout the chapter. But first a word on figure of speeches.

Figure of speeches are God’s way of emphasizing important points within the text of His Word. They are not haphazardly used. As such a greater understanding of God’s messages can be obtained when this fundamental principle is known and understood.

As stated, Genesis one contains a treasure trove of figure of speeches but one in particular stands out. It is the figure of repetio. This figure has several variations, but I don’t want to get bogged down with the nuances of them. Instead I’ll leave that aspect to any interested person to flesh out on their own.

As the word “repetio” suggests it’s the repetition of words and/or phrases that are emphasized. In Genesis the predominant phrases repeated are “God said . . . and it was so.” The emphasis isn’t on what was said, but rather that whatever God says is so and true. It will come to pass.
In my humble opinion God wanted to establish a core principle that flows throughout the rest of Scripture. Whatever God says we can rest assured that it’s true and will come to pass “it was so”. We can be assured of that whenever we look at His creation.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I think you're right, but I also think you're onto something much more. In general, I see the scriptures as flat black print on white paper that leaves the average reader befuddled, confused, or bored. These people seek preachers and priests to tell them what it says.

For those who have been born again, God's Word is read and illuminated by the Holy Spirit, the Teacher, and shines like a laser pointed into a multifaceted prism, whose lights beam out and shine in every direction, revealing layers upon layers of truths, promises, and hidden knowledge all laid out in the open.

It's possible the Urim and Thummim, held only by the High Priest, were a symbolic representation of the Holy Spirit to come, poured out and to be given to all. In the same vein, God spent much of the OT speaking to one chosen man at a time, until the The Chosen was born, and now speaks to all people, His people, personally and individually.

Sorry to go off on a tangent there. Your post reminded me that God's Word is like an onion, comprised of multiple layers.
 
For years I’ve seen people focus on the creation of God whenever discussing Genesis chapter one. It’s been my humble opinion that the true emphasis of the first chapter of the Bible has been missed. The springboard for my viewpoint rests upon the foundation of two points. The first being Romans 1:25.

NIV: They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

The second point being the significance of figures of speech found in the Bible. Genesis chapter one being a treasure trove of them, but there is one that stands out throughout the chapter. But first a word on figure of speeches.

Figure of speeches are God’s way of emphasizing important points within the text of His Word. They are not haphazardly used. As such a greater understanding of God’s messages can be obtained when this fundamental principle is known and understood.

As stated, Genesis one contains a treasure trove of figure of speeches but one in particular stands out. It is the figure of repetio. This figure has several variations, but I don’t want to get bogged down with the nuances of them. Instead I’ll leave that aspect to any interested person to flesh out on their own.

As the word “repetio” suggests it’s the repetition of words and/or phrases that are emphasized. In Genesis the predominant phrases repeated are “God said . . . and it was so.” The emphasis isn’t on what was said, but rather that whatever God says is so and true. It will come to pass.
In my humble opinion God wanted to establish a core principle that flows throughout the rest of Scripture. Whatever God says we can rest assured that it’s true and will come to pass “it was so”. We can be assured of that whenever we look at His creation.

Any thoughts?
I had this conversation the other day. Not specifically about Genesis, but the idea in general. The conclusion we came to is if you can do anything, why not add a little poetry and imagery in, because people need that for a sense of emotional connection.

You not only see it in repetition, but in reversals. The most famous one being Peter's three denials and then three times reaffirmed his commitment.

Another one being Paul was intellectually blinded, then physically blinded, then being intellectually given revelation, then physically getting his sight back.

Its kinda cool to see the art in it.
 
Last edited:
As the word “repetio” suggests it’s the repetition of words and/or phrases that are emphasized. In Genesis the predominant phrases repeated are “God said . . . and it was so.” The emphasis isn’t on what was said, but rather that whatever God says is so and true. It will come to pass.
In my humble opinion God wanted to establish a core principle that flows throughout the rest of Scripture. Whatever God says we can rest assured that it’s true and will come to pass “it was so”. We can be assured of that whenever we look at His creation.

Any thoughts?

Thank you for posting this validation of my frequent posting here of God's Message, which permeates the New Testament throughout.

And His Word, based on that Message, of brotherly love, compassion, forgiveness, and peace.

Anything that does not break that Word, is not a sin...this is the Message that is repeated throughout the New Testament.
 
Thank you for posting this validation of my frequent posting here of God's Message, which permeates the New Testament throughout.

And His Word, based on that Message, of brotherly love, compassion, forgiveness, and peace.

Anything that does not break that Word, is not a sin...this is the Message that is repeated throughout the New Testament.
I'm always in awe of how God works with the individual to reach them filling up any void in their life.

You're welcome.
 
I had this conversation the other day. Not specifically about Genesis, but the idea in general. The conclusion we came to is if you can do anything, why not add a little poetry and imagery in, because people need that for a sense of emotional connection.

You not only see it in repetition, but in reversals. The most famous one being Peter's three denials and then three times reaffirmed his commitment.

Another one being Paul was intellectually blinded, then physically blinded, then being intellectually given revelation, then physically getting his sight back.

Its kinda cool to see the art in it.
Our emotional well being is very important to God. It's why much of His communication with us is in language we connect to on an emotional level.

Numbers in scriptures is another fascinating field of study. The number three is representative of completeness/nothing more needed. So many significant examples of this, but perhaps in light of the recent celebration, the three days of Jesus' internment in the grave comes to my mind. Imo, it represents the completeness of his death leaving no doubt that he was dead. From that completed state God raised him from the dead.
 
I think you're right, but I also think you're onto something much more. In general, I see the scriptures as flat black print on white paper that leaves the average reader befuddled, confused, or bored. These people seek preachers and priests to tell them what it says.

For those who have been born again, God's Word is read and illuminated by the Holy Spirit, the Teacher, and shines like a laser pointed into a multifaceted prism, whose lights beam out and shine in every direction, revealing layers upon layers of truths, promises, and hidden knowledge all laid out in the open.

It's possible the Urim and Thummim, held only by the High Priest, were a symbolic representation of the Holy Spirit to come, poured out and to be given to all. In the same vein, God spent much of the OT speaking to one chosen man at a time, until the The Chosen was born, and now speaks to all people, His people, personally and individually.

Sorry to go off on a tangent there. Your post reminded me that God's Word is like an onion, comprised of multiple layers.
No tangent at all. Much can be learned through these moments of thoughts.

I like your onion analogy. As long as you keep a spirit of humbleness I think God can/does open your eyes to greater truth in that which you've already learned.
 
A rejection of the majority of God's Word is NOT following the message of God's Word...:rolleyes:...far from it...
 
I'm always in awe of how God works with the individual to reach them filling up any void in their life.

You're welcome.

No void really, was born into the church to Sunday School teacher parents. And then did the youth group Born Again thing at 16.

Cheers!
 
A rejection of the majority of God's Word is NOT following the message of God's Word...:rolleyes:...far from it...

If you can tell me how following His Word as I posted it 'rejects' the majority, I'll be here.

If what you posts doesnt break His Word...it's not a sin, keep that in mind when you list the rejected stuff.
 
No void really, was born into the church to Sunday School teacher parents. And then did the youth group Born Again thing at 16.

Cheers!
Sometimes the voids are in our understanding.
 
Sometimes the voids are in our understanding.

I understand His Word pretty well. It's pretty clear and when in doubt, I try to fall on the more generous, positive side.

And when I dont, I ask Him.
 
It’s a creation myth and I think you’re reading things into it that aren’t there.
Myth or not, figure of speeches are a legitimate tool in any writing. If you doubt it just Google the phrase "figure of speech" and you'll discover they aren't just Biblically used.
 
I understand His Word pretty well. It's pretty clear and when in doubt, I try to fall on the more generous, positive side.

And when I dont, I ask Him.
Ok.
 
Myth or not, figure of speeches are a legitimate tool in any writing. If you doubt it just Google the phrase "figure of speech" and you'll discover they aren't just Biblically used.
I know what a figure of speech is. The creation myth is not a figure of speech.
 
It’s a creation myth and I think you’re reading things into it that aren’t there.
Moderator's Warning:
Need I remind you that you're in Theology? Tone this sort of rhetoric down.

Let me be clear to EVERYONE, this thread is in the Theology forum.

Rule Set
- Threads and posts that are critical of religion or its spiritual aspects in a broad fashion, or are focused on attacking non-belief, are not allowed.
- Skeptical posts/threads from a non-religious basis, or ones deemed overly antagonistic towards religious beliefs, will be considered “trolling”.
 
Revived because someone asked about it. My apology if reviving it violates any rules.
 
For years I’ve seen people focus on the creation of God whenever discussing Genesis chapter one. It’s been my humble opinion that the true emphasis of the first chapter of the Bible has been missed. The springboard for my viewpoint rests upon the foundation of two points. The first being Romans 1:25.

NIV: They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

The second point being the significance of figures of speech found in the Bible. Genesis chapter one being a treasure trove of them, but there is one that stands out throughout the chapter. But first a word on figure of speeches.

Figure of speeches are God’s way of emphasizing important points within the text of His Word. They are not haphazardly used. As such a greater understanding of God’s messages can be obtained when this fundamental principle is known and understood.

As stated, Genesis one contains a treasure trove of figure of speeches but one in particular stands out. It is the figure of repetio. This figure has several variations, but I don’t want to get bogged down with the nuances of them. Instead I’ll leave that aspect to any interested person to flesh out on their own.

As the word “repetio” suggests it’s the repetition of words and/or phrases that are emphasized. In Genesis the predominant phrases repeated are “God said . . . and it was so.” The emphasis isn’t on what was said, but rather that whatever God says is so and true. It will come to pass.
In my humble opinion God wanted to establish a core principle that flows throughout the rest of Scripture. Whatever God says we can rest assured that it’s true and will come to pass “it was so”. We can be assured of that whenever we look at His creation.

Any thoughts?
The words of the Bible often contain multiple senses, the Church Fathers distinguish between the literal* (that which the human author intended to directly convey) and the typical (that which God intended to convey by way of analogy with something directly stated). The typical sense can in turn be divided into the allegorical (regarding a truth to be believed in), the tropological (a moral lesson), and the anagogical (something to be hoped for). The typical sense is predicated on the literal, since it's the literal subject-matter that serves as a type or figure of the extra-literal meaning.

Volumes have been written on the spiritual meaning of Genesis. Such work is of great value, but does not negate what the text explicitly states about the history of the world.

*Figurative language, as in parables, is not an exception to the primacy of the literal, author-intended sense. In the case of a parable, the author-intended meaning simply is the moral of the story, and there is no separate typical sense. It's generally not hard to distinguish figurative from proper language; only highly motivated exegetes think Genesis 1 is entirely metaphorical.
 
The words of the Bible often contain multiple senses, the Church Fathers distinguish between the literal* (that which the human author intended to directly convey) and the typical (that which God intended to convey by way of analogy with something directly stated). The typical sense can in turn be divided into the allegorical (regarding a truth to be believed in), the tropological (a moral lesson), and the anagogical (something to be hoped for). The typical sense is predicated on the literal, since it's the literal subject-matter that serves as a type or figure of the extra-literal meaning.

Volumes have been written on the spiritual meaning of Genesis. Such work is of great value, but does not negate what the text explicitly states about the history of the world.

*Figurative language, as in parables, is not an exception to the primacy of the literal, author-intended sense. In the case of a parable, the author-intended meaning simply is the moral of the story, and there is no separate typical sense. It's generally not hard to distinguish figurative from proper language; only highly motivated exegetes think Genesis 1 is entirely metaphorical.
Are you familiar with the figure repetitio? It's the one l specifically cited from Genesis 1. FOS are not haphazardly used and this one was one of the first that marked out was important (attention directing purpose).

The repetitio figure here emphasizes the phrase "God said" (repeated nine times) followed by "it was so" (repeated five times). For phrases to be repeated our attention should be raised to meditate on what God is drawing our attention to. I can think of nothing more important to believe than God wanting us to know we can trust His word. Whatever He says will be, will be. That principle carries all the way through the Bible.
 
Are you familiar with the figure repetitio? It's the one l specifically cited from Genesis 1. FOS are not haphazardly used and this one was one of the first that marked out was important (attention directing purpose).

The repetitio figure here emphasizes the phrase "God said" (repeated nine times) followed by "it was so" (repeated five times). For phrases to be repeated our attention should be raised to meditate on what God is drawing our attention to. I can think of nothing more important to believe than God wanting us to know we can trust His word. Whatever He says will be, will be. That principle carries all the way through the Bible.
I didn’t disagree with that. But for Genesis 1 to teach us to trust God’s Word, it’s necessary for the particular things it says to actually be true, even if those particular things are less important.
 
I didn’t disagree with that. But for Genesis 1 to teach us to trust God’s Word, it’s necessary for the particular things it says to actually be true, even if those particular things are less important.
We can trust God's Word, while acknowledging man's mishandling of it. The key is taking what we have and trying to extract what's still the "original" word of God from that which man has injected into it. It's a monumental task, to be honest, but enough can be extracted to get to the point where we can trust this or that verse to be reflective of the "original".
 
We can trust God's Word, while acknowledging man's mishandling of it. The key is taking what we have and trying to extract what's still the "original" word of God from that which man has injected into it. It's a monumental task, to be honest, but enough can be extracted to get to the point where we can trust this or that verse to be reflective of the "original".
If you don't trust the Church to preserve the substance of the original, there's little reason to think that you personally could decipher the original content. In any case there's no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the text of Genesis 1 has been relevantly altered. Indeed those who think it compatible with an old world usually argue (with equally little basis) that it was misinterpreted, not that the text was corrupted.
 
If you don't trust the Church to preserve the substance of the original, there's little reason to think that you personally could decipher the original content. In any case there's no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the text of Genesis 1 has been relevantly altered. Indeed those who think it compatible with an old world usually argue (with equally little basis) that it was misinterpreted, not that the text was corrupted.
I think it is more a matter of trusting God's holy spirit to preserve the substance of the original than anything else...His spirit can accomplish anything...
 
Back
Top Bottom