The element of solids is created
Here we see that the Supreme Being created yet another element or state, that of solids. "Land" here is allegorically used so that those without a scientific understanding could relate to it.
If these scriptures, written thousands of years ago, were to utilize language that scientists use today, no one would have understood them. This doesn't mean that there is no accuracy here, however.
Remember the analogy discussed in the previous commentary, of how a parent might explain their job to their child. The parent would put the language in such a way that the child could relate to. The parent might also use some allegory, using a simplistic representation to illustrate how they do their job. If they got into the technical areas of their job, the child could not understand them. The parent would not lie to the child about their job. They would simply describe it in words the child could relate to.
In the same way, Genesis simplifies the creation within a language that people who had no telescopes, no microscopes, and little understanding of the universe could understand.
The accuracy in Genesis is that God produced each of the core states of matter, and the atomic elements that make up those states. He first created the fluid state and those atomic elements that make up fluids. Then He created the gas state, expanding upon (or "separating") the fluid state. Now He is creating the state of solids and those elements - also referred to in other ancient texts as the element of "earth."
Do we really need to know all the technical information about how the Supreme Being created each state of matter and each element? Do we need to know which chemical reactions He stimulated first, and how each was set up? And what good would it do us if we knew this information? Would it allow us to know God better? Would it make us happier?
In addition to using language that a common person thousands of years ago could understand, Genesis also utilizes the word "day" to account for time. Sectarian interpretations of Genesis have tried to put forth a literal doctrine, proposing that all of the matters of creation, from the beginning to the end took seven earth days consisting of 24 hours. Does this make sense?
Any scientist will tell us that the word "day" is relative to the observer. To a person on the planet Venus, a day would last about 243 earth days. Depending upon the planet's position to the sun, and its rotation on axis, the length of the day is different for every planet. Now let's consider what a "day" might be in other solar systems, where planets are on significantly different orbits, with different types of suns. Then let's consider what a "day" might be to a person who wasn't a citizen of a particular planet or even solar system, but someone who's realm was greater and larger than that even of a galaxy.
Or further, let's consider the Supreme Being, Who is not subject to time. Time does not control God. Therefore, the "day" discussed here is not only relative, it is entirely meaningless in terms of gauging using our earth clocks.
In other words, a "day" here would translate to millions of earth-years.
A proportional universeThe above point takes the air out of many modern scientists' argument that creation according to Genesis could not have happened. When we remove the interpretation that the technical details are to be taken literally, and we take into account that the language was simplified to communicate to people of a more simple era in human history, we can begin to realize that yes, God could certainly have created the physical universe as described in Genesis.
We must remember that we too are children in the scope of the Intelligence that produced the mechanics of the physical universe. And if Genesis got even a little closer to the technical details, creation would still be over our heads - due to the limitations of our minds.
This ability to arrange the elements is the essence of proof of the existence of an intelligent Supreme Being. Arrangement means there is an ultimate cause, and there is intelligence and purpose behind the arrangement.
We can see the Supreme Being's arrangement from the largest to the smallest things. We see arrangement within the galaxies and solar systems; and see similar arrangement within the atoms and molecules. And we see that everything in between is also intricately and beautifully arranged.
Consider the various arrays we see around us: Of swarms of fish symmetrically flitting through water. Of flocks of birds flying in symmetrical formation through the air. Of patterned stacks of cells making up skin or any other body part. Of root systems and tree branching that expand with Fibonacci arrangement.
Centuries ago, scientists found that nature was filled with the Fibonacci rectangle and triangles - also called the 'golden rectangle' and 'golden triangle.' As they measured the height verses width of trees, people, animals and so on, they continually saw this proportion, eventually named the golden ratio (1.6180339....) duplicated throughout nature. They saw it among hands, feet, arms, faces, branches, fruit and practically everywhere else within nature.
This type of arrangement among nature is not accidental. It is not as if an accidental explosion could produce perfect symmetry among nature, along with evolution and learning systems randomly. It is virtually impossible - as most of the brilliant minds have come to understand - that this level of arrangement could be accidental.
While these facts are certainly scientific, this opposes the assumption of many modern scientists that the universe is the result of a random, accidental explosion.
Let's use an example. Let's say an alien who knows nothing about humans walks into a house and sees in the living room a sofa, chairs, coffee table, lamps and TV; all arranged in such a way that all the chairs face the TV, and the lamps are behind the chairs. They also see that the coffee table is between the sofa and the TV.
What would the alien suppose about this living room? Yes, they would conclude that the persons living in that house had a special inclination to look at the television for some reason. And they'd be right.
But what would be their most basic assumption? That there were living beings who arranged the house in a particular way. They would assume that the house was maintained by living beings.
Why? Because they saw arrangement within the house. They saw that the chairs and sofa and television were placed in a particular way. In other words, they not only saw organization: They saw a purpose to that organization.
This is precisely the scenario of the physical universe. We see tremendous organization within this universe. And yes, that organization would certainly indicate an organizing force.
But we also see arrangement with purpose. We see that the organization of the physical world indicates purpose.
Scientifically, every cause must include the potential for its effect. Since there is arrangement and organization within nature, there must be an Organizer. There must be an Arranger. This is the Supreme Being.