Introduction to New Genesis Theory
One of the most common questions asked by skeptical readers after newly exploring the Genesis of creation- in comparison to geological data from modern science- is usually similar to: ‘Can the story of Genesis really be believed as the record of God creating the universe and Earth in six days, almost six thousand years ago?’
A following question may be: ‘Are we missing something that brings you and so many other Jews and Christians to believe the Bible’s creation myth, despite archaeological discoveries of pre-biblical settlements and radiometric and isotopic dating of ancient rocks, which clearly point to earlier humans and a world billions of years old?’
Short answer: ‘Yes, you are missing an entire framework of time in Scriptures that correlates with empirical discoveries.’
The first thing for skeptics to understand is that the introduction sentence in Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” may be followed by a description of how the Creator did it, as is commonly interpreted by its following sequence of days, or it may serve as an initial foundation from which an entirely new series of creative events and historical restorations unfold, as Gap Theory and other old-Earth (or progressive) creationism theories maintain. Then again, the initial sentence may confess both and more. Seemingly, if someone wanted to pacify the deepest questions of scientifically primitive humans in an early culture, he or she could write a bold introduction sentence like the one in Genesis and follow it by any series of events relevant to the culture’s history. Doing so would not make the following genealogies and stories false, but the very beginning of the creation of the universe and Earth would remain somewhat mysterious. What appears to be an absolute beginning of the creation, explained by the proceeding text, can revert back to an initial creation before a much later history unfolds in the textual sequence. In other words, the sequence of days need not refer to the creation of Earth and the universe.
For example, the first paragraph in an autobiographer’s book may neglect important details of his or her early life, if explaining them at the time would potentially steal their readers’ minds away from a desired theme.
There is no requirement that states that an author must present his or her early life annually from the very first sentence onward, for they are free to disclose more of their youth later within their book. He or she may decide to take an unorthodox approach and lightly touch upon their youth and later revert back to explaining things that they previously chose to omit. He or she could say, ‘First, I was born in Texas’ (or wherever) then skip those early years and describe their years in college.
If someone had written something similar to the first sentences of Genesis, like, “For starters, I was educated at Huntsville High School and Texas A & M University, and my social life was void and uncultured,” we would expect the author to either look back at those empty social years, to elaborate upon them, or for him or her to explain how they thereafter changed their social world for a new life, temporarily leaving the past at an undisclosed distance. The initial mention of high school and college may merely serve a narrative springboard or a setting of the literary stage for explaining how the writer later worked to improve his or her social life. We would comprehend that important things were purposely omitted from such passages, and that we would have to do a much deeper reading if we really wanted to know about those earlier years in the author’s life.
In the same way, Genesis sets the stage for a series of restorative creations after the initial sentence that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” The first sentence does not necessarily mean that there was not a long process of time in which the universe was created or even that Earth was created at the same time as the early universe. For many Bible readers, the heading sentence is proceeded by a description of the ultimate creation, but in New Genesis Theory we will take the approach that the summary following the actual creation of the universe and Earth is God speaking of six, specific millenniums (six Divine days) to prepare for the earliest, enlightened form of civilization, for the time and region that Adam and Eve dwelled (southern Mesopotamia, c. 4000 BC)- His restorative works in millenniums leading to their lives. (NB: In another theory we will reveal how Genesis does reveal ancient creation works.)
Simply put, the focus is shifted away from God explaining what He was doing in distant eons to works He did to immediately prepare the way for the mother and father of the first city-state civilization, beginning the genealogy of the Messiah and His record of global redemption. He was preparing a place for them: their garden paradise region.
For some readers it does not matter whether the Genesis beginning is posited at 6,000 ka or 12,000 ka, simply because both are a far stretch from an ancient universe that is approximately 13.8 billion years old, with our solar system forming around 4.6 Ga. For them, patience is needed to perceive how the smaller picture and sequence of time fits concisely into the larger one of an ancient creation.
Considering the smaller picture first, we will look back almost 12,000 years ago to comprehend God’s six millennial days of developmental works (see New Genesis Theory after this introduction). But first, we would be wise to contemplate the mindset of God in a parent-child relationship, to better comprehend how He unfolds His revelations.
FATHER OF WISDOM, CHILD OF CURIOSITY
Imagine a child approaching her dad as he stands in their kitchen, and that she proceeds to ask him what he is doing, as children often do. To this he might playfully reply, “I made a bowl of my favorite cereal. First, I took cereal from the pantry and milk from the refrigerator. Second, I took out my bowl from the cabinet and spoon from the drawer. Then, I poured the cereal and milk. Now I am going to sit down, relax, and enjoy it.”
This sequence of events might pacify his daughter’s initial curiosity, at least for an unreflective moment. But suppose that his selfsame daughter then walks away, sits at the breakfast table, and exclaims, “Hey dad, there’s already cereal spilled on the table!” Her dad might simply laugh and reply, “That’s because it’s not my first bowl!” Further, the father may have made a bowl of cereal a week before his daughter’s harsh interrogation, or perhaps even several bowls, leaving crumbs, and still his statement would be true nonetheless- though not very sanitary, not being wiped absolutely clean from the breakfast table.
Now when we were toddlers in understanding, we did not notice the clues left on the world table, for the Word of our Father was sufficient for our perception and level of comprehension. However, we have grown in knowledge much like the daughter in my analogy, and our Father expects us to ask more questions in the process of time and growth of human insight. It makes His Scriptures no less true if we seek deeper meaning behind His marvelous creations. We need not ignore the earlier cultural crumbs or think that further questions would insinuate that the Father’s Word is untrue or that we do not believe Him.
God’s biblical disclosures had to meet the ages of the world’s understanding where they were, which reveals His patience and genius. No thoughtful parent teaches in such a rush that it leads to rash confusion. Satan is called “The Author of Confusion” in Scripture specifically because he hastily seeks to confuse and deceive people with new knowledge that they are not ready for, with false knowledge woven in, but God is orderly, patient, and wise.
Thus, it is not a great leap to assume that an infinite Designer has done infinite works before what we have learned in Scriptures, before the little information given of our ages. God did not float in a void for infinite time before us, only beginning His works with us a short time ago. And the spiritual realm did not lack a material counterpart until half a dozen millenniums ago. It is not illogical to conclude that God did many other works even here on Earth, and especially in the vast plains of the universe, but sewed a mystery into Scripture for us to unravel during a future of empirical investigations.
Scripture explains that the world was made for God’s pleasure, His bowls of cereal, not ours, and many believers have stumbled over this simple truth when establishing their biblical ideas and doctrines. We are not able to sum-up God and His infinite works based upon our own limited knowledge and intellects. We currently cannot comprehend life without a beginning or an end and must have milestones placed within eternity. Furthermore, the Father need not specify every detail of His works to children who can never receive enough answers for their endless questions.
However, He may have left clues for us to reason over as we grow, even as the father in my analogy did for his daughter. Perhaps, being a Parent, He enjoys watching us explore and learn for ourselves from the clues he has allowed to remain on Earth. Possibly, part of the joy of being the “LORD of Hosts” is that the multitude He hosts will also have joy in learning the mysteries of the universe over time- by their honest, investigative works. Really, what fun would there be in life with no joy of discovery and adventure?
This is the concept upon which New Genesis Theory rests, that God- possessing the intelligence to coordinate paths and works of electrons, neutrons, protons, and every atom in the world- is able to hide truths in His words until He is fully ready to reveal them to a maturing humanity. Scriptures which appear irreconcilable with natural facts on a surface level are meant to be searched out and magnified under closer inspection with the passage of time, for what He has revealed in His Word always proves true. The more Scriptures are magnified, the more of the mystery of His creations we are able to perceive from the great depths of His perfect wisdom, in His intelligent designing of the world and its biblical history.
The Divine Scriptures were designed to pacify the spiritual needs of various ages of believers, as evident by the Bible’s unequaled distribution from past ages to its embrace by billions of people in recent centuries. No other book in human history has come close in comparison (not even the satanic seduction of Carl Marx) which alone confesses the genius of scriptural design. Its dozens of beloved books were carefully copied with reverence to the Divine at the scrutiny of ancient scribes; canonized by the faithful among Jews and Gentiles; and they continue to be cherished around the world. And this is after the fact that some had earnestly sought to keep the words confined, selfishly, to the Latin of clergy, under a religious penalty of death. Further, Jewish scribes (and some Gentiles scribes) have long held to a tradition of ridding Bibles once mistakes or notable blemishes are found within them. Thus, the greatest Book of all times has been translated in many languages, and with subtle differences in new versions, but nothing has been lost to history from its original texts.
God wisely guided writings which pacified ancestral believers like children with coloring books, yet the Bible boggles the minds of faithful readers today as a masterpiece of literary art. It reveals astounding things that must be put under the microscope of higher faith and anticipation for us to perceive them: His deep truths hidden in historical mysteries. In short, the success of Scripture is what we would expect from words given by the true God, with its longevity and embrace by people of various cultures since before the Common Era. (NB: God is not, and never has been, against human reasoning, and He encourages us to reason over His works, but He is against partial reasoning when it is utilized in an attempt to tempt others to doubt or dismiss His Word.)
When cells divide (meiosis or mitosis), there are new beginnings brought forth from the old ones, but what if their divisions had never been observed by scientists? If only one glimpse of one cell was magnified and studied, it would be equivalent to the snapshot of the Genesis creation account. The newly discovered cell, like the Genesis, would be a mystery for mankind.
Therefore the researcher of Genesis is left with the responsibility of looking elsewhere for signs of new beginnings or mitosis, or he or she may simply trust that the one cell, newly discovered under the microscope, is the very first cell. After all, that one cell did indeed have a beginning, though not in absolute terms. But just as bodies are filled with cells, there is a biblical canon of books full of information that should be explored for better understanding of Genesis’ creation. God’s beginning account- His Genesis– is meant to be searched-out like a mystery by those who truly seek something more than a superficial or surface level of comprehension.
It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. The heaven for height, and the earth for depth… (Prov. 2:3) KJV
Does God have a testament of restoring, renewing, or remaking the world- its newer ages from past ages? Is the Genesis creation account actually a section of renewal history cut from a longer history of the world? Does God give precedence for His creation wording being misconstrued as the absolute beginning, concealing greater truths from mankind? Does the Creator have a record of even suggesting these things? Has He concealed some things regarding the Genesis record within His Word? Furthermore, might God also enjoy His mysteries being searched and found-out by His children?
Please consider this train of thought, and know as we continue to explore it that I, the scribe of this article, am not stating that Genesis only explains a recent restoration, but I must focus reader attention on the smaller ripple of biblical time before the larger one of ancient eons can be perceived in their timely construct.
After a little biblical research, it becomes apparent that God does word renewed things and renewed ages as new, for in Revelation the Lord says that “the former things have passed away,” and, “Behold, I make all things new.” He concludes with: “Write, for these words are faithful and true,” expressing that His creation works and the words describing them are true. Thus, the Lord tells us that He restores and makes new ages from the old. Before explaining that He makes “all things new,” the prophet saw “a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away.” Clearly this means that such drastic changes are done by the Lord YHVH that the earth and its heavens are called a “new” creation, but they are literally renewed from the old corporeal. He makes old things new. He will not soon destroy the earth but restore it for the world to come.
A more precise English word is recreation, or perhaps renewal, for the Greek word also means afresh. If He makes “all things new,” it implies that the new is made from the old; otherwise, the wording would be: “I make all new things.”
This is much like the Lord Messiah saying He gives a new commandment, but it is actually built on the foundation of the famous ones before it. He gave a New Covenant, but it was founded upon the truths of the Old Covenant. He brings down a New Jerusalem, but it is built upon the ruins of the old city. Zion is said by David to “abide forever,” which means ages upon ages of time, though it takes several renewals; and this should be considered in light of God making a new heaven and Earth (i.e., a new world-age).
Some may then say, ‘This speaks of the future, but you speak of the past.’ To this we must remember that the Creator does not change in His ways; His manner of works for tomorrow will be much like His works of yesterday. Hence, His words are retroactive because He does not change; only we change in the process of studying His creative works. Our perceptions of His works are meant to change as we grow in biblical enlightenment, but eternal God has no new awakening, new enlightenment, or shifting of plans in some new revelation; He is consistently the same in His perfect understanding and wisdom.
In ancient Hebrew thought, a renewal was the same as making something absolutely new, for all things come from an eternal God. Read the following passage very carefully to understand that this is true:
You hide Your face, they are troubled; You take away their breath, they die and return to the dust. You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; and You renew the face [surface] of the earth. (Ps. 104:29-30) NKJV; emp. mine
It is therefore scripturally sound to proclaim that God creates the new from the old and that He often words renewals as new creations. As an example, this would be like one of us saying that we bought a new jacket, but the fabrics first came from other places and raw materials; such items may indeed be new to us, and we may only know of their new history, but there is “nothing new under the sun.” Out of all the things that we claim to create and make, and out of all the things that we call “new,” what have we done that is truly new with new materials? If we, therefore, are able to call our alterations to natural materials new creations, can the Creator of the universe not do the same thing with His ancient materials- seeing that we were created in His image and to a certain extent we think like Him?
Therefore, by the very Scriptures we have established precedence that God may speak or imply of making or creating new things, and it does not necessary mean that something great was not there beforehand, for the renewed things are called “new” creations. Thus far, this could be what God did, as worded, in the Genesis creation account, establishing a feasible hypothesis by the very Scriptures which must interpret Scriptures. A new age brought forth from an older one may be worded as a new creation. It may be considered new to God and His people.
What about people, about Adam being newly created? Scripture also reveals that people are also spiritually created new from the old. As Paul said, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” Are those who are conformed to the Lord’s image really new, or are they renewed? Are all things literally new to them or but figuratively renewed by spiritual conversion? Thus, if we are made new in “the image of Christ,” but come from the old, with our pasts graciously wiped clean before God, it stands to reason that even those who were made in God’s image in Genesis could also be considered or called a new creation or new man, even if they came from other people as we have, keeping with the pattern of Scriptures.
Note that I am not affirming that Adam and Eve had parents, for no doubt Eve was created wholly new for a special purpose in the story of redemption, but I am making a point that other people may have lived, dust from dust from ancient ages. This is no stretch; it is simply comparing Scripture with Scripture. Thus, when any man or woman dwells in the Holy Spirit of God and Truth, separated from evil for light, he or she is considered reborn spiritually or created anew, simply because their pasts are wiped clean and their sins are forgotten via His redeeming.
Adam and Eve also birthed a new creation or new world age, or, as archaeologists call the time and region of their origin: “The Cradle of Civilization.” However, we must not remain blind to older settlements if they have been found. If we build one sandcastle but then abandon it to build another, the second is still designed new whether we use or do not use some of the sand from the previously abandoned castle. We can no more ignore the dust from whence man came than we can the dust in which Scriptures reveal we are, lest we choose to remain the toddler not perceiving the truths of the crumbs. Adam was brought forth from the dust and livingly called “dust” by God, destined to return to dust, but who were the dust before him? Who was the first adam from the ground?
As a Christian, I understand other Christians not wanting to imagine anything extra-biblical when it comes to God making Adam from the dust of the ground, but Adam is not the only one whom we find in Scripture made from dust. Job, whom we know had a mother and father because of his book, said, “Your hands have made me and fashioned me, an intricate unity; yet You would destroy me. Remember, I pray, that You have made me like clay. And will you turn me into dust again?” (See Job 10:8-9 in NKJV.) If we did not, or could not, consider the rest of the Book of Job, we might jump to the conclusion that Job was a new creation from God, and that he was not born into the world. And his story does relate to the Genesis account of Adam because the same word (asah) for “made” in Genesis 1:25-26 was used by the righteous man.
So God making all the creatures that He created on the sixth (millennial) day does not necessitate an absoluteness of new species. Neither does God making Adam from the dust determine that he was not born of the dust or adams before him- not if we let the Scriptures set our hermeneutic rules.
Therefore, by Scripture alone, one believer may believe that Adam was created absolutely new and another would be as justified by Scripture in asserting that he was only referred to or described as a new creation because of an inner transformation of soul and spirit; he could have been taken from the previous dust and then perfected in God’s image. God is enlightening Spirit, and the flesh profits little, yet people are ensnared by the flesh. Nonetheless, whichever belief is eventually validated as the complete and absolute truth, it will not deviate from the panoramic patterns of God nor seek to disprove God’s words. And still, if another takes the view that Adam was indeed created absolutely new of the dust, and yet others were before him, no controversy need disturb the faith. Truths are sometimes tricky when the wisdom of God calls for impatient humanity to wait as we learn.
In fact, God never says in Scripture that Adam proper was the very first person ever created; He only implied it for our youthful conclusions, much as the daughter in my analogy jumped to her own conclusions. The word Adam is not merely a proper noun, but it is also among other general Hebrew words meaning man, such as ish. God was Adam’s Father, but so is He to all His children- all His earthly adams. Eve (Chavah) was also a general paleo-Hebrew word for to breathe, which basically means to live. Hence, her name is tied into the breath of the Spirit of the living God. As for Adam, the passage is true whether we say ‘Let us make MANKIND into our image’ or ‘Let us make Adam in our image,’ for the word for Adam proper and adam as general man are the same, left to our interpretations.
In English and many languages we capitalize proper names, but in ancient Hebrew there was no distinction via lowercase and uppercase letters; much depends upon religious viewpoints. Wherever Adam is found in Scripture, the proper name can be- depending on the context in which it is written- replaced by man, mankind, or humankind. Likewise, Eve can read to breathe or living, although for several centuries now we have had vowel and pronunciation marks in Hebrew that restrict liberty in interpreting the words, which did not exist in any of the original and early Hebrew Texts (e.g., Masoretic).
CLUES FOR A NEW BEGINNING
Many clues of other people can indeed be found in Genesis’ short creation summary, which inform us that others had existed on Earth long before Adam and Eve proper. For example, God told Eve that He would “increase” the pangs (or pains) of childbirth, not make original childbirth painful. This implies that there were already childbirths before her conception and pregnancy, and that it was already something painful, for truly Eve had yet to conceive a child. How might the pangs of childbirths increase if childbirths had yet to occur on Planet Earth? And even if one does not accept that childbirth was already something occurring, clearly it was known to soon be painful before increasingly painful, which does away with any notion of life being without pain in the Garden of God on proto-historic Earth. The whole notion of a painless and blissful life on Earth before the transgressions of Adam and Eve was completely contrived, and is perpetuated, by exegetes and theologians.
Genesis professes that there were already painful childbirths taking place in the world before Eve proper had a child, but because Adam and Eve chose their knowledge over God’s words, God decided to genetically modify her and/or their progeny- possibly with bigger craniums that could retain greater knowledge- to remind them and us exactly how they had rebelled against Him. Deliveries would become more painful, by whatever physiological alteration came from God, and if humans believed that they could find all truths of knowledge in the natural world without God, I suppose that God was more than prepared to help them meet their challenge. And if bigger heads are not what made childbirths more painful, the fact that there was already pain before pain being increased still compels Bible-believers to reconsider earlier life or Planet Earth.
But, was this God being mean and cruel or righteous and just? Eve greatly increased God’s own labor difficulties in birthing righteous humans on the earth (6,000 years of work since the beginning of the Holocene), and God must be just with 6,000 years of increased hardship in a like manner. Hence, there is a reason why we endure such pains for six millenniums as we work and await the coming Kingdom.
And, yes, God also uses female terminology for His creations, for both male and female were made in the image of He who is Holy Spirit. In Scripture, God creating the world and His people is likened to Him giving birth, which has nothing to do with gender but everything to do with the world coming from Him, as an infant comes from the matrix of maternity. Women were created in God’s image, too, with symbolism in their bodies to express both the joy and pain of His works of bringing life and righteousness to the world.
Likewise, Adam corrupted God’s planting for a spiritual harvest of righteous humankind, so Adam’s harvest was so hindered and cursed with drought- earth for earth and dust for dust for six millennial days (age of redemption). Truly God must keep the scales of Divine justice, and cruelty was not His intention, for if God did not uphold the scales of universal justice, nobody in Heaven or on Earth would eternally persist to do so. A God of laws must ultimately keep those laws, which makes us glad to have an acceptable sacrifice in Christ our Yeshua. God is still laboring to bring forth righteous mankind, His harvest, and mankind is still reflecting that as shadows/images of His works.
God separated them, placing them in a garden that He had planted “east in Eden,” and this implies that there was already a named city, village, community, or a specific region- Eden– before the famous garden. Someone must build a city or grow a community for it to exist, and it was clearly there before Adam and Eve were given their fertile paradise which God planted for them.
The garden and Eden are not entirely the same thing; it was not originally a garden called “Eden,” as later simplified in Scripture, but a garden planted within something already there- east in Eden. Eden was a community or known region in southern Mesopotamia, and it (along with surrounding rivers and regions) had its name- if Genesis is to be taken literally- before the garden that was planted within it.
And even for those who believe it was but a name for a geographical location, it would imply that God had named small regions in the world within His creation week but then left Adam to name all animals, and mankind to rename much of what He had previously named. Eden appears out of nowhere from the perspective of an absolute beginning of humankind in Genesis, yet the name has been found in various Sumerian writings that precede Moses. But perhaps to some readers this is the most menial of these points, so we shall move on.
Consider that before they were cast out of the garden of paradise, when the Lord confronted their trespasses, He asked, “Who told you that you were naked?” After that, He said, “Have you eaten from the tree of which I had told you not to eat?” It can be argued that it was but a rhetorical question and God was merely gaining a confession for that which He already knew, but the point is that the wording implies that there lived more than one person (Satan) who could have told them that they were naked. Otherwise, the question might have been, ‘How did you know you were naked?’ or ‘Did Satan tell you that you were naked?’ Again we are left with a hint that more readily professes that Adam and Eve were not alone in the world. More than one other being could have informed them. (I do not believe that animals talked “before the fall.” God gave us common sense for a reason, and it is not anti-biblical to explore the fossil record and find that it does not confirm a belief that ancient animals had human vocal organs.)
Remember Cain: He knowingly feared that wherever he went that people would kill him, but to whom was he referring- seeing that he, suggestively, was the only living son left of Adam and Eve? When Eve later had another son, she named him “Seth” to replace slain Able (see Gen. 4:25). And Eve having other sons and daughters is not mentioned until later in the genealogical record. So did Cain fear his own future sons or relatives? Much confidence must be placed in Cain’s intuition to conclude that he thoroughly thought about such things, and so quickly- though he acted rashly with Abel- that others would be born of his sons or father to hunt him down and murder him.
And who exactly did Cain marry in the Land of Nod? Possibly his sister, but we are left guessing (see Gen. 4:16).
Further, what was his mark of protection, and how could it warn people not to kill him when encountering him, especially if there was no society at the time, with no written language in effect? Could such a bodily mark be a tribal warning in which others could read and thus fear killing him? A symbol that warned implies others would understand it, but who? Why would God put a mark on him before others were even born to persecute him? And how would other people know it was a warning?
Why did Cain build an entire city for himself and his wife? It can be reasoned that he built it over several centuries as his children were born and grew in population, but it seems much more likely that he was among another people and enlisted their help: people who could hear of him slaying his brother. There is a big difference between building a home and building a city or community, and there is a big difference between placing an unintelligible mark to somehow warn future people and placing a known warning for people he would encounter in the land of Nod. And, like the region of Eden, Nod also appears abruptly.
When we reason over ancient Scriptures, it is often tempting to overlook what some passages may actually refer to, simply because the Word of God is enigmatic and people are conditioned in their religions to accept or deny certain ideas. Genesis is often interpreted so strictly that many people do not allow for reasonable interpretations that differ from what their errant churches have traditionally taught, especially since Augustine argued for Catholicism against ancient ages of the world, while other passages, which clearly do not fit the literalist view, are not so embraced or argued over. Many of these other passages suggest an older planet and humankind.
“Consider the years of many generations,” as Moses instructed (see Deut. 32). The Lord did not say that God will keep covenant for a thousand generations, which is likely 40,000 years in biblical generations (1000 x 40), but keeps. There is more than one way to interpret the following passage, but it hints at the possibility that God has been making covenants with people for a much longer time than literalists allow for. The question becomes, is it justified that passages like the following must be interpreted as poetic and figurative, whereas the Genesis account does not allow for deeper reasoning? In the New Covenant we have an everlasting covenant, with evil soon destroyed before 1,000 generations, at the G.W.T.J., but the following passage hints at generations that may have began long before us:
Therefore know that the LORD [YHVH] your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations [40,000 yrs.] with those who love Him and keep His commandments; and He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slack with him who hates Him; He will repay him to his face. (Deut. 7:9-10) NKJV; intrpl. mine
Further, God told Adam and Eve to replenish the earth, which is from the Hebrew word mala, meaning fill, refill, restore, or expand to a fence or border. The word is used a few times after Genesis and is as least once or twice descriptive of replenishing or regenerating as opposed to simply filling anew (cf. Jer. 31:25; Ezek. 26:2). Thus, Adam and Eve could only replenish- if meant in the sense of restoration- the earth if it had first been emptied, depleted, or greatly diminished of inhabitants of a prior epoch. Nor must “earth” imply the entire planet, for it can be read as a region or land.
Personally, I believe that people who spoke Hebrew and translated it “replenish” five centuries ago had a much closer etymological connection to the original meaning of the Hebrew word mala than we do today. Meanings behind ancient words subtly change and oftentimes lose their fullest applications over long stretches of time. I think the KJV “replenish” is an accurate term given by its translators, for a world truly needing restoration. Apparently, the world’s population was diminished sometime before Adam and Eve c. 4000 BC.
It is also interesting that God created each species (brought before Adam to name) “according to their kind” rather than creating each and their kind. The Hebrew word achar– for “according” (in some translations “after”) – means afterwards, coming after, or from behind. It denotes progeny coming into existence. Hence, the wording is peculiar because it more readily implies God creating animals after their species or “kind” was already extant rather than God describing creations of absolute new kinds of animal groups, for the first time.
Moreover, God was not alone in creating Adam and Eve, but said, “Let us make man [or Adam] in [or into] our image,” and Job records that those who were called the “sons [or children] of God” were with Him. Theologians may assert that these sons of God were only angelic spirits, but the fact that some of them later had children with Adam’s fallen descendants says a lot for reality. As angelic as they may have been, they were every bit as earthly-endowed as people are today.
The tribes of Israel are also called the “son of God” and His “children” in Scriptures, as are Christians in multiple passages. But does this mean that we must imagine glorified, mystical beings with wings? Those who helped God in Genesis may have originated from anciently chosen tribes or communities as well, simply possessing greater stature than the people of Adam. The Genesis account gives them no glorious wings or glowing halos, as have Judeo-Christian interpreters and artists. Nor does Scripture give a measurement to their greater stature in Genesis. If one community of people averaged four or five feet tall, and another came along which averaged seven or eight feet tall, the latter would be considered giants (i.e., Nephilim). Genesis describes them as famous warriors from ancient times when the Text is magnified (see Septuagint version).
Moreover, much of what is believed today of Genesis was imagined by early theologians and scholars. The “sons of God” were clearly people genetically like us who were already living on Earth. It is really that simple, no matter how special they were. Adam was made to be like them and a God who, at times, walked on Earth via Messiah.
As a preliminary conclusion, Adam and Eve were sanctified unto the Lord as new creations, but when they came out of Garden of Eden, there was a larger world that had been completely diminished or was scarcely populated. Who were they? If we do not acknowledge the clues left on the Genesis table, we may suppose an absolute beginning of all life, but why not take these clues, among several others, and follow them through with the logic of a deeper search?
Surprisingly, Genesis’ account of Adam and Eve does not witness to an absolute beginning of humanity, as it seems to with but a superficial reading. Upon magnification it establishes unspecified people already living in the textual backdrop. Genesis merely focuses upon Adam and Eve as God’s immediate work. Many people who have studied the book in great depth have been astonished to realize this.
Adam was the first man in a new beginning and a new work of God for righteousness, from whom the genealogy leading to Yeshua- Jesus Christ- came. The first Adam in the line was a living soul, and the last Adam (Christ) was a life-giving Spirit, but “first” and “last” in Scripture have everything to do with completing God’s genealogical work of redemption. We know because men and women have lived since the ministry of Yeshua.
Thus, if the Messiah is spiritually the last or second, being perfect, then it is logical to conclude that Adam was also figuratively the first in the work via being made perfect before God. God figuratively began with Adam as a new work and figuratively ended the work at the cross. But people lived on the Earth before Adam’s life and after Christ’s sacrifice. Paul’s words are often confounding, and most people will readily admit this (cf. 2 Pet. 3:16), but we are granted plenty of Scriptures to clarify his roundabout and enigmatic sayings.
And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (1 Cor. 15:45) NKJV; intrpl. mine
The first part of the quote in this Bible translation should not be in quotations, for Genesis simply explains: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (See Gen. 2:7 NKJV.) Only “man became a living soul” should be. Calling Christ “Adam” is merely expressing a new beginning for us, for Christ was also a man, an adam. But Christ was not the last man born in the world, and Adam proper was not the first created by God.
The point of Paul in utilizing terms like “first” and “second” and “first” and “last” was to point us to God’s redemptive works through Christ, but they do not serve as strong scriptural evidences for those who wish to deny works of the Lord prior to Adam and Eve. Nor do they exclude mankind needing redemption further in the past.
Hence, God began an historical account with Adam to reveal and evidence how He redeems, but clearly there was a another world in the background that requires another story. And if we believe that the Son of God was indeed the manifestation of God on Earth in the Genesis account, we must conclude that many of His ancient, earthly works (before Adam and Eve) simply could not be contained in Scripture:
And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen. (Jn. 24:25) NKJV
So if the Lord will not put new wine in old wineskins, lest the new expand and tear, ruining both, He would not fill a new history of man by extending an earlier history that He was ending or completing.
A good mother does not toss her baby girl away to baby her grown daughter. Both have their own place and time as her new creation and are tenderly attended with wisdom. The baby must be treated as if she was the first, beginning a new life and history, but her special treatment does not nullify her Mother’s prior labor for the life of her sister. If the mother begins a baby book for the infant daughter, does she not begin with the baby and not the earlier history of her sister, though the sister may be pictured or mentioned somewhere in the textual backdrop for those who look closely?
If we conclude that Adam was the first man of the physical world and Christ at last was the first begotten of the spiritual world, other textual problems arise, for Christ is without beginning in Heaven and was begotten here on Earth. Therefore, these “first” and “last” and “first” and “second” were not written to establish that no man existed before Adam, but only that he was the first man in the works of God for redemption, which was completed in the second adam we call “Christ,” and we are grafted into the works that were finished at the cross, although we clearly live long after the “last” Adam ascended back into the heavens. The place where we find the first and the last are the genealogies that lead from Adam to Christ, and in Christ being “the First and the Last” in all God’s works.
In conclusion, it is unsound to extract half of Paul’s passage for a literal/corporeal interpretation and then leave the latter half for a figurative or spiritual one. And, indeed, every passage utilized for young-Earth theology can as easily be extricated from mistaken biblical cosmology to better profess an ancient planet.
“If I have covered my transgressions as Adam, by hiding my iniquity in my bosom, because I feared the great multitude, and dreaded the contempt of families, so that I kept silence and did not go out the door- Oh, that I had one to hear me! Oh, that the Almighty would answer me, that my Prosecutor had written a book!” (Job 31:33-35) NKJV; intrpl. mine
Job was making his case by comparing his innocence to the things Adam proper did, for Job felt rejected and cursed before God as Adam was. But what “multitude” did Adam fear while in hiding, especially if he was the only man until his latter children? Obviously Adam lived in a house in the episode that Job spoke of, seeing that he would not “go out the door” to deal with the “contempt of families.” Is it possible that a man, separated from a larger community, can both have a small house and walk about naked in his garden paradise, living before God? Or must Adam and Eve only be allowed to dwell in the underbrush with wild animals, sleeping beneath the stars?
It appears as if the contempt that families had for him concerned the cursed soil and their agricultural difficulties, which of course has historically been Adam and Eve’s fault. It can be reasoned that the multitude thought Adam had trespassed and angered God. There was no farmer to till the garden grounds, and God brought Adam there, but does that necessarily mean that there were no families in surrounding regions? If we consider how Job obviously felt- cursed and rejected by God and the community that had once adored him- we picture a man called “perfect” like Adam, which points us back to what we Christians commonly call “The Fall.”
It can be reasoned that Job’s description of the multitude and Adam concern something which took place hundreds of years after Adam’s paradise dwelling, but the passage we have of Adam hiding is when he lived in paradise and hid from God because their trespasses would be exposed. God did make Adam and Eve clothes after they were exposed, but must that imply that they had nothing material before that, or are we assuming that Adam and Eve had no house or things until much later on? Are we projecting our modern, first priority of clothing on an ancient, innocent people of different cultural understandings and values? Would we not have to ignore the entire parallel idea of Job’s plight from blessed perfection to curse in order to disassociate the multitude from the fall of Adam, simply because Genesis provides a simple picture of two naked people?
And note that Job said in this context, “Oh, that the Almighty would answer me, that my Prosecutor had written a book!” Now, we know that God has written a Book (the Bible). Clearly Job knew of it via scrolls of the Torah. We know that God prosecuted Adam and found him guilty, but the only charges brought against Adam in the Bible are from when he sinned and hid from God, which directly ties the “great multitude” into the initial transgression. God brought no charges against Adam when He brought the flood, for Adam had already been dead for over six centuries. Clearly Job spoke of Adam during the time of his famous transgression, and thus the “great multitude” that he hid from cannot be easily dismissed for theological traditions with a younger view of world history.
If we resolve that Job did not know what he was talking about, or that he was only being poetic in his times of anguish, then we can do the same with other passages to promote our own reasoning and exegeses over what the Bible clearly discloses to us. But then God might also say, “My servant Job shall pray for you. For I will accept him, lest I deal with you according to your folly; because you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has.” (See Job 42:8 NKJV.)
There is no mention of a multitude in Genesis except the “sons of God,” to whom the Lord said, “Let us make Adam (or adam) in our own image.” Yet, when all the biblical pieces are put together, it appears as if a larger community was a part of Adam’s life, and he feared them as much as he did God finding out his transgression. When God cursed the earth it also cursed other agricultural people- increasingly arid conditions of the time and location that have been scientifically verified at the end of the Holocene Optimum.
It is unusual for an honored patriarch to fear his own nearby or future family and grandchildren without doing something terribly wrong, but if Adam was thought responsible for the cursed, rainless earth, the garden region, one can imagine that even the “sons of God” would be a bit disgruntled with him for causing it. These two things appear to be connected in the story: 1) God said, “Let us create man in our image,” and 2) there was “no man to till the ground” (the garden that God had planted), and He made Adam in (or into) their image and placed him there to work. If the “sons of God” were formerly a righteous people whom the Lord walked among and instructed, it seems fair to think that Adam’s transgression may have also affected them.
If we take-off the rose-colored glasses of religious interpretations and merely look at Scripture through the lens of what is written, certain conclusions begin to form: 1) A group of people lived on Earth before Adam and Eve, called the “sons of God,” like the titles given to Israel and Christians who are also called the “children” and “sons of God”; 2) people existed whom His “sons” were forbidden to take wives from, just as Israel was at first forbidden to intermingle with pagan nations, and Christians were told not to be “unequally yoked” with nonbelievers; 3) before these people of greater stature disobeyed with the fallen people of Adam, first the Lord said, “Let us make mankind [Adam] in our image,” and then God brought him into a paradise region and had him begin naming animals that migrated there; 4) Adam and Eve at first trusted the Lord’s words, but then began to trust their own understanding of good and evil and were expelled from the guarded garden; 5) there may have been animosity between those who farmed and those who hunted, as one brother killed the other because the meat offering was preferred above the agricultural offering; 6) Cain had a tribal mark placed on him so that other people would recognize it and not kill him for what he had done to his hunter brother; and 7) Cain fled to another region, got married, and built a city.
These clues, along with pangs of childbirth being increase and the “multitude” Adam hid from, and whatever other clues I may have left out, may cause a loss of religious innocence when seen for what they suggest, but that is to be expected when spiritual toddlers grow to discern things that had not previously been questioned. It was not for the child in my analogy to know about earlier things, but only for her to receive simple answers as she grew, like humanity. Yet it seems to me that we have grown in our understanding, not just in our science but also of the Scriptures, knowing what has been impeded because of religious traditions. And it also seems that more than enough clues are given for the mature believers of today to conclude that other children of God lived on Earth before the specific works of God with the renewed line of Adam and Eve.
Concluding this is no surrender to the Theory of Evolution, which has no place in my theories, rather it suggests taking the Bible for what it actually reveals, no matter what the rest of the world may believe of it or our faith. Once we embrace these clues instead of ignoring them, the truth of earlier civilization and life protrude from the pages against traditional religious dogma, and they must be heeded if we are to learn the absolute truths of creation.
Note that none of this is meant to demean children. In fact, the same questions are often asked by curious children when they first read the Bible: “Who did Cain marry?” “Who helped him build a city?” “Who else was he scared of?” “Why were Adam and Eve ashamed of being naked if they were husband and wife, and nobody was around except for God?”
This is not being condescending, but oftentimes children ask questions that come to adult minds but are ignored- lanthano. Why? Adults often feel attacked on all sides for what we believe, especially in this post-modern, secular humanism era that grows openly hostile to biblical faith, but children take to learning with joy, still forming what they will someday reasonably accept. As adults, we should make like children in our learning about the Kingdom, for comprehension of the beginning brings better comprehension of the end of the age.
In conclusion to these apparent anomalies, it appears that much is not told but is merely suggested in the Genesis creation account. The suggestion is that an advanced, more civilized and righteous people lived under God’s rule and perhaps instructed a less advanced people from Adam. Adam was first made perfect in the image of God, yet after his fall his children began to reproduce with the “sons of God” who were already there. It was Adam’s line that first needed redemption, and his descendants reproduced with others who were originally restricted to their regions.
Also consider that angel simply means messenger, despite how our latter religious cultures have depicted them. These messengers in Genesis probably did not swoop down from an abode in the clouds to snatch up mortal women to be their loving wives. Magnifying the subtle clues of the account reveals something more down to earth and natural. Although I acknowledge that the Genesis account suggests a new creation with a casual reading, clues left within it should be reasoned over to see how they fit other Scriptures. If the “sons of God” were with God during His works before Adam, and they took daughters of Adam and had children with them, clearly the “sons of God” had similar or the same human genome, along with the same reproductive desires that other humans did and still do.
We can imagine them however we want, with great wings and halos or whatever else we decide to add to Scriptures, or we can consider them much like us, only from an age before us, then falling with the children of Adam. There is no mention of God transforming spiritual beings into physical people to reproduce with the progeny of Adam, nor of them performing such a feat by themselves- not in what is recorded in Scripture. Those who insist upon young-Earth theology must inject spiritual beings into their cosmology, with messengers transforming into men or becoming some hybrid of spiritual beings and earthly ones. Maybe they were, but the biblical facts are that they married women and reproduced with them, and they lived on Earth before Adam, with no halos and no wings in the Genesis account. At best they were probably people of a greater physical stature.
After the heavens, the earth, and mankind may now, by design of Scripture, be discerned as renewed creations in the Genesis account, we should explore whether scriptural precedence for a renewal is also available to support the whole scheme of the six creation days, or descriptive wording that might suggest that the creation account was actually the restoration of another, proto-historic age. And if we find that there indeed is, we should also provide a reason for why God would create a new world-age and destroy or diminish a lesser populated one. Otherwise, this theory lacks a sound motive to justify its alternative exegesis. Further, these hypotheses must supply a biblical reason and precedence for God not disclosing the older age plainly, only leaving us clues to be searched through.
With little effort we find an historical, biblical event which mirrors the Genesis description of the world during the works or creation, which was when God’s people in Jerusalem had long-rebelled in abominations, violence, and worship of pagan deities. God described Judah being led away captive and the destruction of Jerusalem in a way that remarkably mirrors the description of the world during the Genesis creation. With this correlation we have a motive for God ending the proto-historic age before the new beginning with Adam and Eve.
“For My people are foolish, they have not known Me. They are silly children [comparable to Adam and Eve], and they have no understanding. They are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.” I beheld the earth, and indeed it was without form, and void; and the heavens, they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled, and all the hills moved back and forth. I beheld, and indeed there was no man, and all of the birds of the heavens had fled. I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land was a wilderness, and all its cities were broken down at the presence of the LORD, by His fierce anger. For thus says the LORD: “The whole land shall be desolate; yet I will not make a full [absolute] end. For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black, because I have spoken. I have purposed it and will not relent, nor will I turn back from it. The whole city shall flee…” (Jer. 4:22-29) NKJV; emp. mine
If the result of the punishment of Jerusalem is described to mirror the description of Earth at the beginning in Genesis’ renewal account, it may be logically deduced that Genesis may describe a world, or even a specific region, formerly punished for absolute wickedness or worship of other gods. It can be reasoned that ancient, pagan temples and communities, perhaps over 12,000 years ago before the new beginning, were cleared of inhabitants and that their proto-historic communities were destroyed, leaving a similar description. Then God, not making a “full end,” restored the ancient world in a timely process with wording suggestive of a new creation. From the ancient age came a remnant of rebellious mankind and the “sons of God.” Hence, He made all things new as He later did for Jerusalem after the void and dark world of their punishment.
When all other natural features were prepared for the renewed and consecrated lineage, Adam was a man made perfect to lead humankind in dominion and obedience to God. A new light of knowledge was given to him, as well as a new command to “be fruitful and multiply.” He would replenish the earth. The children of God would help make him in their image, after the image of our perfectly righteous God.
REBELLION OF THE MESSENGERS
Now I will speculate about what may have occurred, for it seems as if some of the ancient men of renown- the “sons of God”– rebelled at the work of God in Adam, becoming adversaries under their leader Satan. It does not appear that they rebelled at him being created, for they initially “shouted for joy” at the works of God, as expressed in the Book of Job. What they were envious of seems to involve Adam and Eve tending the garden paradise. Within it was placed the Tree of Life, which, if people ate from- or continued to eat from- they could live forever. Hence, God placed angelic guards before the garden after their expulsion.
We can only imagine the consequences if a literal plant or tree such as the Tree of Life existed in the world today- one that would enable people with access to live as long as many people did in the days of Adam and Eve. And if there was only one tree, or the Tree of Life, whoever gained possession of it could misuse it as leverage to control the entire world, to reign diabolically over both the meek and elites at the height of totalitarianism.
Now imagine what would happen in the garden if it was made off limits to some people and tended by a single, simple couple. Perhaps, for some reason, even the sons (or children) of God did not have access.
To further speculate, what motive(s) did Satan have in possessing the serpent to eat from the tree? Why spiritually possess a serpent and not another animal unless it was to sneak in unnoticed, cunning and subtle? And could there have been a decoy tree (i.e., Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil)- one with an explicit warning that it was not to be eaten from? Did Satan seek the true Tree of Life? Was the serpent/skink caught by Eve as it began eating (or was about to eat) of the decoy tree? Did he then seek a human subject to test its fruit? Is this why he was not only called a “liar” from the beginning but has been repeatedly been called a “thief”?
It seems as if all these things are tied into the initial conversation about Adam and Eve not dying but rather becoming as gods if they ate of the tree. If the enemy thought that the forbidden Tree of Knowledge was the Tree of Life, it would make them like Gods to eat and gain long life, but even if it were not, they would not die within a mortal day.
And did Adam and Eve eat of the true Tree of Life before being expelled, which gave them long life, even centuries?
Were the cherubim guards and the sword placed before the tree after Adam was expelled to also guard against others who might seek to obtain the priceless fruit? Is it possible that such a treasure could exist and a great thief not seek to possess it? Perhaps the garden region was off-limits to all fallen humans of the prior epoch except Adam and his wife who tended it? Perhaps they hid after their trespass when they realized the garden had been infiltrated by evil, and when they heard the Lord walking they did not initially know it was Him. It is plausible that this contributed to them “feared[ing] the great multitude” that Job spoke of.
Although this is all human speculation, not revelations from above, it makes sense that there is much left undisclosed in the short story of God’s garden.
What we do know is that a community called the “sons of God” were forbidden to marry Adam’s fallen descendants, yet they did anyway rather than remaining true messengers of God and His righteous. They had a certain region, and clearly it was Divinely separate (or separated) from the people of Adam. When we take a closer look, we find that Jude, brother of Messiah, wrote of “angels” as he did of other rebels in biblical history: as real people.
And the angels [lit. messengers] who did not keep their proper domain [or region], but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day [GWTJ]; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these [straying people], having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. (Jude 5-7) NKJV; intrpl. & emp. mine
Jude was not being racial as we know it today, but as a faithful Jew who kept from marrying foreigners because the world was filled with paganism, under the ordinances of Torah, he perceived that the sons of God had rebelled to leave their own region and they began to intermarry with the descendants of Adam and Eve. The point of showing the above passage is to make it clear that there were earthly divisions or regions, much as there still are today, which the formerly-righteous messengers transgressed.
In my opinion, those who were the children of God before Adam and Eve, who had a part when God said, “Let us make Adam in our image,” should have helped Adam and his descendants in a new, righteous beginning for formerly fallen mankind, before the Holocene. Yet it seems as if the infamous messengers of God, beginning with Satan orchestrating their fall, sought to cast away the boundaries set by God, which led to the “sons of god” marrying the fallen people of Adam and Eve. (NB: These things have nothing to do with “sons of Seth and daughters of Cain” fiction- an explanation which would be a division of descendants not supported in Scripture.)
These things can be a bit confusing, so try to imagine it like this: The Apocalypse has come and gone, and the Messiah is now reigning over the nations of the world with His “Bride” citizenry in Israel, who are also called the “sons of God” and the “children of God.” The Tree of Life is returned for long life, and the blessed ones are reigning with the Lord during the millennial Sabbath paradise. Yet other nations of people still exist, fewer in number than pre-apocalyptic times but extant nonetheless. Now suppose that the domain of the elect, of those who are made like the “angels of Heaven,” is all of Israel. Imagine that the Lord might say, ‘Let us make mankind into our image,’ speaking of spiritually conforming other nations, that they would be taught by His citizenry messengers. In essence, the Lord would start anew with fallen mankind, leading the post-apocalyptic world to righteousness.
How terrible would it be if the newly glorified people of God- His messengers of the covenant- took their liberty in Christ as a license to sin, although they had already been glorified in the flesh to live for centuries and were there in the Sabbath millennium to teach the righteousness of God to the nations? This would be a great rebellion against God’s earthly Kingdom. Six thousand years of God working to redeem mankind, teaching His virtues, love, grace, justice, and righteousness, would be hindered. In other words, if the elect were living for hundreds of years, beautiful and glorious, and the rest of the nations were still perishing as people do today, would some of the elect- “the Bride”- be tempted to play God and sneak the life-sustaining fruit to those who were dying?
With freewill there is always the great potential to fall, and without freewill there is no true life at all, so we should take the former days into account to admonish us for the future. If, in the future, those who reign with the Lord again have access to the famous Tree of Life (or even several of them) and over time the righteous become complacent and daring, it is possible that some might become tempted to act before permission. If those who were called the children of God (or angels) before us can fall, it can be assured that the freedom to fall will exist in the future.
Although such things are virtually unheard of in Christianity, we can rest confident that God grants freedom, and the choice of good or evil rests upon the shoulders of the free. To whom more is given, more is required- with a stricter punishment for transgressions.
Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city [New Jerusalem]. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie. (Rev. 22:14-16) NKJV; intrpl. mine
If God was to describe His works during the Great Sabbath, would He, like Paul, call believers “new creations,” with all things becoming new to them? Would they be called His “sons” or “children” or “messengers” of His covenant? Would they be forbidden to intermarry with those of other nations who had not yet become transformed by the faith? Or could those who are made like the angels of Heaven become jealous if the Lord decides to share the leaves of the trees of life for “healing the nations,” as described in Ezekiel? Would any of the elect become their adversaries after the bitter war and seek to trick them into disobedience against the Lord, perhaps after they are made perfect?
These are simply speculations that should be considered with the few clues afforded us from the mysterious story of Genesis. But what we can be sure of is that the new heavens and new earth are a restoration coming for the elect, which parallels our ideas of the original paradise. When we add Scripture to Scripture it is clear that the new heavens and earth in Revelation are really a new world-age. Likewise, when Peter said in Peter 3:6 that “the world that then was perished,” he was not speaking of a different planet or universe but rather of a world-age passing away.
Like the future event, Earth’s evil history may have been purposely omitted by God:
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; for behold, I create Jerusalem as a rejoicing, and her people a joy. I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people; the voice of weeping shall no longer be heard in her, not the voice of crying. No more shall an infant from there live but a few days, nor an old man who has not fulfilled his days; for the child shall die one hundred years old, but the sinner being one hundred years old shall be accursed. They shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build and another inhabit; they shall not plant and another eat; for as the days of a tree [centuries], so shall be the days of My people, and My elect shall long enjoy the work of their hand.” (Isa. 65:17-22) NKJV; emp. & intrpl. mine
When we carefully study the prophetic passage above, we quickly find that it does not fully mesh with most Christian eschatology. It seems that Jerusalem and the world will be restored over a period of time, and yet the Lord calls it a creation of new heavens and a new earth. Clearly unrighteous people will still exist during the messianic millennium, but the blessed will have access to the city and the Tree of Life.
At 100 years old one will be considered a “child” in the coming Kingdom, and if one dies at that age he or she will be considered accursed. So here we find what our eschatology should look like, with biblical authority, to the point that we should pay no heed to faulty doctrines being fed to others by religions that disregard the whole of Scriptures. The Messiah will rule over the nations with a “rod of iron” during this time, to bring refinement, but the result of the work is considered a new creation to God, where the past of evil humankind is soon forgotten.
The point being made is that parts of the future may point back to the historical past on Earth. To understand the beginning, it may help to look to the end revelations. Not only should we look back and into the future, but we should consider the entire history of God’s work in Israel.
It is not that we seek to connect these things by personal will, but God leads us to “compare spiritual things with spiritual things” to discern His revelations.
There is a reason why God inspired Prophet Jeremiah to use the same sentence to describe the nation of Judah that Moses did in the Genesis account: “And the earth was [hayah, i.e., became] without form [tohuw] and void [bohuw]…” (See Jer. 4:23.) The description of Judah’s punishment- a relatively small nation- appears to be of a desolate world, simply because God worded it as such through the prophet, but such conclusions are relative to our perceptions. Further evidences of God using similar terms are seen elsewhere in Scripture, such as in Psalms, and in Isaiah where the prophet says that the Lord “makes the earth empty and makes it waste,” before the prophet goes on to reassure readers of a new, glorious age under the coming Messiah (see Isa. 24:1).
So the questions become: ‘Why would God cause Prophet Jeremiah to describe the punishment of Jerusalem in terms so similar to the creation account in Genesis?’ and ‘Why would He cause Isaiah to mirror creation with destruction?’ A logical answer is that God would restore them afterwards in the same manner as He renewed the ancient world.
EVERYTHING MADE NEW FROM OLD
We now need to confirm that the Lord giving Adam and Eve His Spirit may also be worded as something new, but others may have had spirits before God gave His to Adam. And if we can show that God only considered those who received His Spirit new creations, we have reason for Him not specifying fallen people who existed during or before the time of Adam and Eve. With Scripture we find precedence:
“Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God.” (Ezek. 36:25-28) NKJV; emp. mine
The void-earth description of Judah mirroring Genesis came about because “[God] has spoken,” just as recorded in the Genesis, when the Lord spoke and His will was accomplished in the world. By God’s Word we find a motive for Him ending an ancient age, with a parallel description of the punishment of national Judah. By His Word we find that others may not have been considered His people, unspecified in His new creation, if they did not have new spirits within them. By His Word, we find new heavens, new earth, new creatures, and new spirits, but them all being renewed, although they are worded as if they were, or will be, absolutely new. By His Word we know that the prophecies over Judah took time to fulfill and were not done instantly or spontaneously.
Thus far, it is scripturally sound to conclude that the entire creation account probably points to a renewed world or region of the world from a former age, which leaves us an impression of it being a completely new creation. All things were made new from old, and a clear pattern is given in Scripture to justify this logical conclusion. Indeed, biblical passages should be interpreted after the patterns and truths of other Scriptures.
As the Lord spoke and accomplished Genesis, so does He speak in our times, accomplishing His will through time by renewal events that mirror Genesis. What people often misconceive as instantaneous actions of absolute newness in Genesis does not necessarily match the pattern of God’s continuous works of renewal throughout history. As the Messiah said, the Father still works.
How often have the people of God expected His works to occur instantaneously or in a short time because of things He said, only to later find that the prophecies were accomplished within much longer timeframes? Some Israelites expected the messianic Kingdom millennia ago, and some early Christians looked for an early arrival of Christ, not discerning the signs, but all things were set for appointed times (moedim). Sometimes God speaks and instantaneous things happen, but often, as is evident by the biblical prophets, the Lord commands things centuries and even millenniums before they actually occur.
The point is, when God said the things He did in Genesis, people usually assume instantaneous results, but the pattern of God’s Word through history allows for another, albeit better, interpretation, suggestive of long, creative periods of time. It is scripturally sound to conclude that the Genesis account may be a summary of ancient history, wherein some descriptions may profess instantaneous acts while others may have been accomplished over millenniums. Readers often misconceive the six days of God’s works as rushed, but doing so is inconsistent with how we have seen His works carried-out throughout our history.
God is apparently in no human rush to accomplish His works, but He accomplishes all things at His appointed times. If God says He will make the wilderness blossom and bring forth springs of water, we might rightly expect Him to use natural means and take a little time in doing so, but when He works in Genesis we are only allowed to imagine instantaneous things wondrously brought into existence?
If Genesis does witness to the darkened heavens and the void Earth of a previous, forgotten age, perhaps when God’s jealously was provoked to bring justice, what reason besides pacifying readers’ curiosities would He have for giving the short renewal narrative to His people?
Upon closer inspection, it appears that the Genesis narrative of renewing heavens and the earth was also an ancient warning to Hebrews. God clearly said that He would “call Heaven and Earth” to witness against His trespassing people when He punishes them. In other words, the Divine record of destroying a formerly rebellious age, alluded to in Genesis, would witness against those who would rebel in a like manner.
Moses, who wrote the Genesis account of creation, appears to have utilized it to warn Israelites when laying down the Law for the paradise land that they awaited- a land flowing with milk and honey. But why would he unless some people were punished in the recreation account, in an age before the Adamic renewal? For Moses to explain that Heaven and Earth would serve as a witness against them implies that a prior event should have warned them not to trespass in a similar manner and receive a similar destruction. Why else would prophets after Moses compare the punishment of Israel and Judah to the world at the beginning of creation in Genesis? I think the truth is obvious.
Take heed to yourselves, lest you forget the covenant of the LORD your God which He made with you, and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of anything which the LORD your God has forbidden you. For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God. When you beget children and grandchildren and have grown old in the land, and act corruptly and make a carved image in the form of anything, and do evil in the sight of the LORD your God to provoke Him to anger, I will call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that you will utterly perish from the land which you cross over the Jordan to possess; you will not prolong your days in it, but will be utterly destroyed. (Deut. 4:23-26) NKJV; emp. mine
When this prophecy came to pass, when God “utterly destroyed” the people of Judah, but did not make a “full end,” He gave Heaven and Earth as a witness- a parallel confession to their destruction. The void Earth and darkened heavens had already been written about in the Genesis account. This seems to be saying: ‘Look, I will punish you as I have others before you, as recorded in the passage on Heaven and Earth. I gave them to you as signs of the times to keep you on track. I will blot out your names and memory in a like manner if you continue to rebel and do evils.’
In fact, the threat of “utter destruction” is given prior to the Apocalypse, for those who will not listen to the Tishbite (cf. Mal. 4:6; Gen. 1). As God ended a former age before the Genesis renewal and began anew, so will He do during the Apocalypse when He creates a new beginning for humans on Earth. There will be a new Heaven, a new Earth, a new people, a new spirit within them, in a new era brought forth from the old one which is passing away.
A generation passes away, and another generation comes; but the earth stands forever [eons of time]. That which has been, it is that which shall be. And that which has been done, it is that which will be done. And there is nothing new under the sun. Is there a thing of which one might say, See this, it is new. It has already been for the ages which were before us. There is no memory of former things, and also there is no memory for them of things which will be afterward; with those who will be at the last. (Eccl. 1:4, 9-11) TIB; intrpl. & emp. mine
King Solomon was a wise man, and he was not saying that there would be no new inventions on Earth, for there were new inventions in his own age and kingdom. He was not explaining that there would be no new architecture, for he commanded the glorious design of the first Temple of God. He was not stating that people would not learn and create new things.
He was speaking of ancient ages that had passed from human memory, which are repeated in a cycle. He was speaking of his understanding that God has infinitely existed as a Creator and Designer, long before our age. He was asserting that we have little or no knowledge of the infinite ages past or even of that which is to come. Solomon had the Torah account of creation, which is evident via Scriptures, but he was saying that the world was much older and had forgotten times. So ask yourselves: ‘If King Solomon had the Genesis account of creation and the genealogy of his people, how is it that he spoke of forgotten ages that would be repeated in historical cycles?’
In perceiving that God will create a new heaven and new Earth after the darkness of the coming Apocalypse, which we know to be an actual age of renewal, how would one think the Creator would describe it? For my theory to be all-inclusive of eschatological Scriptures and logically conclusive, I must also mirror the end of the creation account to the new beginning of a new world, showing a cyclical pattern. Surely in God’s wisdom, to verify this truth, it would also be described as the Garden of Eden:
For the LORD will comfort Zion, He will comfort all her waste places; He will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the garden of the LORD; joy and gladness will be found in it, thanksgiving and the voice of melody. “Listen to Me, My people; and give ear to Me, O My nation: For a law will proceed from Me, and I will make My justice rest as a light of the peoples [revelation to the nations].” (Isa. 51:3-4) KJV
Thus far, I have established a complete pattern in God’s works. The Genesis description of the world creation mirrors a description of the Lord YHVH punishing His people for rebellion, but not completely ending His work, rather waiting to restore it. Earth, heavens, humankind, hearts, and inner spirits when renewed are worded as new creations. Furthermore, I have shown that the Lord will restore His people back to a Genesis paradise in Jerusalem, along with the Tree of Life, after justice has been dealt for their trespasses. From a void, dark, unmanned, and desolate world of punishment to a new Garden of Eden, a cyclical pattern emerges. Not only does it emerge, but according to Christ the “children of God” will become as the angels (i.e., messengers) of Heaven and Earth who were before us (see Matt. 22:20). Rather than a simple, linear history confessed in Scripture, its beginnings and endings are a historical cycle of renewal, perceivable as the seasons.
Do not misunderstand in thinking that I am alluding that such a cycle has gone on for hundreds of thousands of years, or anything close to it, but what I am postulating is that other cultures existed before 12,000 years ago, and God began anew with humans in Genesis. I concede that past population and human achievements are not comparable to our world-age on this planet, since the days of Adam and Eve, but clearly the Lord walked among the former “sons of God,” and they had their own laws to keep and punishments for rebellions.
Believing that the world was created in six days almost six thousand years ago is the right of the Bible reader, because God certainly worded it to appear that way with a quick read. Believing this has little to do with one’s personal relationship with God or spiritual salvation, and personally I could not care less how ancient the world truly is. I would rather focus upon prophecies of things soon to come. Certainly there are plenty of facts of world history originating from the time and region of Adam and Eve to forego knowledge of the cultural crumbs left on the table. But having written that, the Great Mystery of God cannot be fully fathomed without considering a much older world.
The 12,000 years appointed to this age since the Holocene restoration- creating paradise for Adam and Eve- serve as a pattern for God’s creative works on Earth, for 12,000 years to God are over 4.38 billion years to us (see ATLAS Theory of Creation). There is so much more that lies hidden just below the surface of Scriptures. Discovering it all is an amazing adventure that leaves those who comprehend these truths marveling at the wisdom and will of God.
These assertions, correlations, and speculations have been given to challenge minds to consider Scriptures anew, as an introduction to New Genesis Theory. In the NGT article, we will cover the Genesis creation line-upon-line and precept-upon-precept, with empirical evidence and facts relevant to the period to support the theory of a 6,000-year southern Mesopotamian restoration: a paradise that God made over time for Adam and Eve to tend and keep.