Horizon - Creation: The First Day

[Harrowby Hall]

Horizon tonight is about the events on 23 October 4004BCE. Well, it must be if Archbishop Ussher's calculation was correct.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Horizon tonight is about the events on 23 October 4004BCE. Well, it must be if Archbishop Ussher's calculation was correct.

Horizon has gone the same way as New Scientist even down to the abstract graphics.

[Harrowby Hall]

Stop Press

At the end of Horizon - academic gives God B+ for Genesis account of creation.

[Jack Knave]

I enjoyed the programme but I did think, with regard to the last one as well, that the reason we have these science programmes based on esoteric speculation is because all the other knowledge, of the down to earth stuff, has all been done or at least there is very little left of it.

Now if our sun was shining blue that would be beautiful. 

[Hope]

At the end of Horizon - academic gives God B+ for Genesis account of creation.

And what is the purpose of the the Genesis account of creation, H?

[jeremyp]

At the end of Horizon - academic gives God B+ for Genesis account of creation.

And what is the purpose of the the Genesis account of creation, H?

Good question, what is it?

How does it fulfil its purpose?

[Hope]

And what is the purpose of the the Genesis account of creation, H?

Good question, what is it?

How does it fulfil its purpose?

I haven't seen the programme, and wondered on what grounds the academic gave it a B+.  If said academic was judging it as a piece of historical record, I think that they should have given it an F.  Did the academic explain their understanding of the document?

It is a theological explanation of how the God of the Jews differs from the gods that they would have encountered during their exile in Babylon, was most most likely written in the early 6th- or late 5th-century BC.

[Spud]

It is a theological explanation of how the God of the Jews differs from the gods that they would have encountered during their exile in Babylon, was most most likely written in the early 6th- or late 5th-century BC.

Do you think the references to creation in six days which occur in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 were written before Genesis 1?

[Hope]

Do you think the references to creation in six days which occur in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 were written before Genesis 1?

They could well have been, Spud.  Remember that in Jewish thinking, 7 is the number of perfection.  That formulaic approach to creation needn't have been introduced for the first time when the early chapters of Genesis were written.

[Spud]

Do you think the references to creation in six days which occur in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 were written before Genesis 1?

They could well have been, Spud.  Remember that in Jewish thinking, 7 is the number of perfection.  That formulaic approach to creation needn't have been introduced for the first time when the early chapters of Genesis were written.

OK, so supposing the Exodus passages were written first, where did the seven-day formula originate?

[Harrowby Hall]

I haven't seen the programme, and wondered on what grounds the academic gave it a B+.

If that is the case, then watch the programme on iPlayer.

All your comment above is doing is reinforcing the image you promote of yourself of being this forum's resident pompous fart.

[Jack Knave]

Do you think the references to creation in six days which occur in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 were written before Genesis 1?

They could well have been, Spud.  Remember that in Jewish thinking, 7 is the number of perfection.  That formulaic approach to creation needn't have been introduced for the first time when the early chapters of Genesis were written.

OK, so supposing the Exodus passages were written first, where did the seven-day formula originate?

Could it be linked to the cycles of the moon of 28 days? 4x7=28

[Spud]

Could it be linked to the cycles of the moon of 28 days? 4x7=28

No scriptural evidence for that; the moon is only used to date feasts which occur at set times in the lunar calendar.

[floo]

Could it be linked to the cycles of the moon of 28 days? 4x7=28

No scriptural evidence for that; the moon is only used to date feasts which occur at set times in the lunar calendar.

Good, as the Bible offers no sort of evidence!

[jeremyp]

Could it be linked to the cycles of the moon of 28 days? 4x7=28

No scriptural evidence for that; the moon is only used to date feasts which occur at set times in the lunar calendar.

So if you were using a lunar calendar (which the Jews did), wouldn't it be natural to break the lunar cycle down into four weeks? According to Wikipedia, this is what the Babylonians did, so the Jews might have got the idea from them.

[Spud]

I can't think of any Bible verses that say the Jews actually did this though, jeremy. I think we can assume they didn't use the moon to calculate what day of the week it was.

[Outrider]

I can't think of any Bible verses that say the Jews actually did this though, jeremy. I think we can assume they didn't use the moon to calculate what day of the week it was.

Indeed, they had three 'days' before there was a sun for the Earth to orbit in order to define what a day was, I think it's fair to say they were just pulling concepts out of the firmament back then.

O.

[Jack Knave]

Could it be linked to the cycles of the moon of 28 days? 4x7=28

No scriptural evidence for that; the moon is only used to date feasts which occur at set times in the lunar calendar.

So are you going to give us the answer?

[Spud]

I can't think of any Bible verses that say the Jews actually did this though, jeremy. I think we can assume they didn't use the moon to calculate what day of the week it was.

Indeed, they had three 'days' before there was a sun for the Earth to orbit in order to define what a day was

The day had already been defined when light had been created and separated from darkness.

I think it's fair to say they were just pulling concepts out of the firmament back then.

O.

For the record, the common approach is to see two main actions in Genesis 1: forming and filling.

But in Genesis 1:2 there are three problems that need solving: formlessness, emptiness and darkness. Hence the two triad approach is a bit of a red herring.

[Outrider]

The day had already been defined when light had been created and separated from darkness.

The length of a  day is not determined by the existence of light, it's determined by the duration of a rotation of the Earth about its axis and the subsequent exposure to the Sun.

For the record, the common approach is to see two main actions in Genesis 1: forming and filling.

But in Genesis 1:2 there are three problems that need solving: formlessness, emptiness and darkness. Hence the two triad approach is a bit of a red herring.

For the record, the common approach is to see Genesis as, at best, a metaphor. It's not a literal record, it's a story, regardless of whether you believe in God or not.

O.

[jeremyp]

I can't think of any Bible verses that say the Jews actually did this though, jeremy. I think we can assume they didn't use the moon to calculate what day of the week it was.

Believe it or not, the Bible is not the fount of all knowledge.

Wherever the idea came from, it's not Genesis because we know that the World was not created in seven days.

[Red Giant]

The main reason to have weeks is to know when market day is.  This cycle must be very ancient.  Holy days were tacked on later.

In rural areas it would be very inconvenient to have a Babylonian-style week where the priests had to decide which weeks would be 8 days long.

[Spud]

The main reason to have weeks is to know when market day is.  This cycle must be very ancient.  Holy days were tacked on later.

Why seven-day cycles for market day and not five, six or eight, though?

[Harrowby Hall]

For what it's worth, this is what Wikipedia says:

While the seven-day cycle may have deep historical origins in the Ancient Near East, the "planetary theory" of horoscopy is a development of Babylonian astrology roughly around 500 BC, with the oldest extant horoscope dated to just before 400 BC.

The seven-day week being approximately a quarter of a lunation has been proposed (e.g. by Friedrich Delitzsch) as the implicit, astronomical origin of the seven-day week, and indeed the Babylonian calendar used intercalary days to synchronize the last week of a month with the new moon.

The seven-day week seems to have been adopted (independently) by the Persian Empire, in Judaism and in Hellenistic astrology, and (via Greek transmission) in Gupta India and Tang China.  The Babylonian system was received by the Greeks in the 4th century BC (notably via Eudoxus of Cnidus). But the designation of the seven days of the week to the seven planets does not seem to have any Babylonian precedent  and is rather an original innovation of Hellenistic astrology, probably first conceived in the 2nd century BC.  It was widely known throughout the Roman Empire by the 1st century AD, and ultimately replaced the older Roman system of the nundinal cycle during the 4th century.

But it doesn't explain the rise - and subsequent fall - of early closing day.

[Red Giant]

The main reason to have weeks is to know when market day is.  This cycle must be very ancient.  Holy days were tacked on later.

Why seven-day cycles for market day and not five, six or eight, though?

The Romans used 8.  Too often would be a waste of time.  I suppose, if the meat was slaughtered on market day, the next question would be, how long could you go on making curries and pretending they were edible.

The whole holy day thing, like the sacrificial rites, might have all been part of a food-hygiene scheme to discourage people from poisoning themselves.