The Gap Theory

[stony ground]

Where do you stand on the "Gap Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_theory)", with regard to your wider beliefs concerning creation?

[stony ground]

And I guess the answer is: nobody cares.

Thanks for the stimulating conversation. :p

[faithinthefire]

It's an interesting possibility, and one that I find fascinating. I haven't decided where I stand on it, other than that.

[seekerman]

Where do you stand on the "Gap Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_theory)", with regard to your wider beliefs concerning creation?

Some of my friends believe that we're in a second earth age and one of their theories is the word "was" should be correctly translated as "became" in Gen 1:2. I'm not sure if I agree with that. I do believe in a supernatural creation process which probably occurred over billions of years and could possibly fit into the gap theory.

[mfblume]

I lean towards it strongly.

[RandyWayne]

Well, we know the age of the Earth is 4.3-4.5 billion years with quite a bit of certainty. The question is where does man fit in that time line? We know that mitochondrial Eve is anywhere from 20 to 100 thousand years old and that all humans went through a single male (Noah) about 10 to 20 thousand years ago. But before these dates we have massive extinctions many millions of years earlier.

[stony ground]

Well, we know the age of the Earth is 4.3-4.5 billion years with quite a bit of certainty. The question is where does man fit in that time line? We know that mitochondrial Eve is anywhere from 20 to 100 thousand years old and that all humans went through a single male (Noah) about 10 to 20 thousand years ago. But before these dates we have massive extinctions many millions of years earlier.


Interesting. I assume you mean that Noah is what science calls the Y-chromosomal "Adam". I never thought about it that way, but that makes sense.

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

I myself favor the Gap Theory strongly, however I am not completely in the 'Old Earth' camp, because I also favor some 'Day-Age' ideas. While I do believe the Earth is exceedingly older than the few thousand years in the Biblical genealogies, I am not convinced of a literal 6 -24 hour period - creation week. The sun (from which we derive our 24-hour day) wasn't even created until the fourth day, so how long were the first 3 days? Thoughts?

And of course the Gap Theory allows for most of prehistory to have occured as we now understand it without conflicting with the Genesis account.

Another question: if you allow for the possibility of the "Gap" between Genesis 1:1 & 2, do you think this is when the war mentioned in Revelation 12:7-9 occurs?

[acerrak]

me personally i dont believe the earth is billions of years old, I belive its more along the lines of 6000 to 7000 years old.

[scotty]

Science contains too many flaws for me to give it much weight. They change too much. The more they study the more they correct themselves and find their own findings to be wrong.
Science once thought the sun revolved around the earth.
Science once thought the earth was flat.
Science once thought the Brontosaurus was a meat eater.

Hows that "God particle" experiment workin out ? Hmmmm.

[mfblume]

I believe the earth is billions of years old. the idea that God created the earth ANCIENT just like He made Adam a MAN and not an infant is silly. There is a reason for making man a man. he had to cope.

Isaiah said God did not make the earth in vain. IN VAIN is the same word used in VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. So if He did not make the world void and without form, then how was it that it BECAME void and without form in Gen 1:2?

[RandyWayne]

Science contains too many flaws for me to give it much weight. They change too much. The more they study the more they correct themselves and find their own findings to be wrong.
Science once thought the sun revolved around the earth.
Science once thought the earth was flat.
Science once thought the Brontosaurus was a meat eater.

Hows that "God particle" experiment workin out ? Hmmmm.

Actually, it's the church that believed those things -and fought scientist tooth and nail when told otherwise.
(I doubt the church ever thought that the Brontosaurus was a meat eater, they just never believed in a Brontosaurus period, or any other dino.)

[acerrak]

I believe the earth is billions of years old. the idea that God created the earth ANCIENT just like He made Adam a MAN and not an infant is silly. There is a reason for making man a man. he had to cope.

Isaiah said God did not make the earth in vain. IN VAIN is the same word used in VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. So if He did not make the world void and without form, then how was it that it BECAME void and without form in Gen 1:2?

the Bible said He formed man, not a baby. . He created a man . a Baby would not be able to tend anything. they would need to be fed etc etc. But God made man and said its Good and put him into the Garden to eat of the fruit. take care of the garden

i belive this is why we have the ages of adam and his sons through passing generations.


Not directed at you mike but general
also something that lived supposedly millions of years ago, can be found on 2000 year old pottery. Im pretty sure its something they visual saw, and made images of

[Timmy]

Science contains too many flaws for me to give it much weight. They change too much. The more they study the more they correct themselves and find their own findings to be wrong.

:blink

[scotty]

:blink

Exactly . :heeheehee

[Timmy]

Exactly . :heeheehee

Oh, it was TIC? Sorry. It's hard to tell, sometimes. :lol

[stony ground]

Isaiah said God did not make the earth in vain. IN VAIN is the same word used in VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. So if He did not make the world void and without form, then how was it that it BECAME void and without form in Gen 1:2?


Excellent point, I never looked at it that way. So do you subscribe to the probability of a primordial flood (from God's wrath, like Noah's flood) during the "gap".

[Sam]

I think the Bible is God's revelation to humankind and just gives us enough information to let us know that He is the first cause and that we all will some day answer to Him.

[BeenThinkin]

Where do you stand on the "Gap Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_theory)", with regard to your wider beliefs concerning creation?


Are you talking about the "gap" from when I start upstairs and then get about half way up and can't remember why I'm going up....but continue on hoping I will remember when I get to the top. Now that's a "Gap!"
:heeheehee

Been Thinkin

[Truth Files]

Response to the OP

Here is a cut from my website regarding creation which is some what long so I will present it in more than one posting:

Does the Bible answer questions related to the existence of the earth, its creation, its purpose, its place in the material universe, its past, and future ?

Yes it does, but it takes time and effort on the part of the believer to study, ponder, and understand a wide range of the scriptures and their correct applications in order to grasp what the Lord is telling us.

The most advanced students of His Word realize that He has not revealed everything to them and that acceptance of this truth will produce a more accurate understanding of some subjects.

He tells us that in the beginning He created the heavens and the earth. We are not told when or exactly how this was done. We know by observation that these things exist because we can detect them with our senses.

There has been much controversy about when and how He created the material universe and observable life forms, particularly humans of our kind who have been created in His image.

This is primarily because of the credibility factor and questions arising from the apparent inconsistencies of what the Bible says and what humans think they observe by discoveries and evaluations of the material world.

Several positions have developed over time for the purpose of either proving or disproving the validity of the Bible as an accurate record of the past, present, and future in regard to the material universe and related life forms.

The positions range from a total rejection of the Bible as truth choosing to rely upon scientific discovery and observation to total reliance on the Bible as the Word of God and authority on creation.

I will address the apparent disparity between the Biblical account of creation, genealogical time inconsistencies, and related observations of the material world.

There are a number of approaches that deal with these issues and at least three significant ones.

The first is that the heavens and earth are very old and the Lord has used an evolutionary process of creation which has taken a very long time to reach the level of human kind.

The attempt here is to extend the six creation days in Genesis into long immeasurable lengths of time.

Creation and evolution continue during each of the six periods. Human evolution then becomes the end result which occurred about 6,000 years ago.

Proponents blend evolutionary processes to account for a very old earth and the recent appearance of humans of our kind to fit the biblical genealogical time frame of about 6,000 years for human existence.

A second theory proposes that the heavens and the earth are in fact very young and only about 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Much is done to refute modern scientific methods and evaluations in order to prove this.

If true, then there is no need to make reconciliation for the time differences between the observed apparent age of the universe and the human genealogical record in the Bible.

I would suggest that neither of these theories give adequate understanding of the Biblical account of creation and related observations made through discovery and analysis.

They are both self limiting and do not provide the best presentations for supporting the Genesis record of creation.

The first theory ignores the literal 24 hour day indicated by the rotation of the earth and the life form "kind after kind" process.

There is also a tendency to support or compromise with the pure theory of evolution which does not include a creator.

There is no need for compromise on this issue in order to support the Bible's picture of creation. Genesis clearly tells us that the Lord used six 24 hour days to do His work.

There is also clear explanation that distinct life forms were created separately and that they reproduce in kind, not by evolution from one species to another.

The second theory limits His creative time frame to only a few thousand years with no indication of any previous knowledge of His existence or actions.

Attempts are also made to prove scientifically that the earth and universe are very young and this is an exercise in futility.

What was the Lord doing before 6,000 years ago ? Did He sit around for billions of years doing nothing and then start His process of creating the universe ?

In the beginning He created the heavens and the earth "together".... at the same time. Genesis 1:1 states this fact.

Our solar system's components were created in the beginning and were not later additions to the universe. Neither was the earth created first with the other components like our sun and moon added later.

We know today that the earth's orbit is dependent upon the existence of the sun's gravitational attraction, not the other way around.

The earth was obviously present in Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. To say that the Lord then created and added the sun and moon next is absurd.

One must use common sense and allow for guidance of His Holy Spirit in the process of interpreting His Word.

Those who manipulate scriptures in order to support their unique interpretations of the Bible cause one to question their credibility.

The heavens and earth are in fact very old by observation and by evaluation through at least a few proven physical laws like the speed of light. Even our own solar system has the visible markings of age, degeneration, and judgment.

We have evidence today that planets close to the earth once had environments like the earth. Now they are desolate and uninhabitable. What happened to them and when ?

There is a third view of these issues which I consider to be much more correct and convincing with no need to compromise, twist, or deceive. The Lord's Word is totally true, complete, and reliable when understood properly.

There is not a great deal of scriptural information addressing this subject, but there is enough to grasp an understanding that makes sense.

Not everything in the Bible can be proven by human intellect and observation and must be accepted on faith.

Genesis chapter 1:1 indicates that the Lord created the heavens and the earth in the beginning. This opening statement tells us that He exists and that He created the heavens and the earth in the beginning.

There is a summary of His creating and forming activities in Genesis that includes the beginning, reconditioning of the earth, creation of replacement life forms, and creation of humans in His own image. [Genesis 2:1-8]

This summary is a recap of how the heavens and the earth came into existence and the generations or phases of His actions.

The "day" (time) in which the Lord "created" is not just one day, but the times and generations of His creative and forming acts. [Genesis 2:4]

These included those in the beginning and those about 6,000 years ago. Humans were His final act of creation for this present generation.

He will renovate and create again after this present age of man's rule of the earth comes to an end. [2Peter 3:10; Revelation 20, 21]

We are not told when the beginning of His creative acts took place. There is substantial evidence in scripture that satan and the fallen angels rebelled against Him sometime between the beginning of creation and Genesis 1:2.

[Truth Files]

Response to the OP continued .....

We can only speculate as to what was going on during the time from the beginning and Genesis 1:2.

The Lord created the angels first and then the material universe and other life forms. We know this because all things were created by Him and the angels observed His creative acts. [Job 38:4-7]

One third of the angels followed satan in rebellion against the Lord sometime between the beginning of creation and 6,000 years ago. Satan and his angels will be cast and confined to the earth at the end of this present age. [Revelation 12:4-9]

Satan's rebellion, sin, and the presence of evil were all operative before the reconditioning of the earth and subsequent creation of humans.

Sin entered the human race through Adam as a result of the choice to disobey the Lord's advice and that we must reject the idea of separating from His providence, direction, and trusting relationship. [Genesis 2:6-17]

There are significant references available to us in scripture and the physical observation of the material world regarding these issues which can enhance our understanding of Biblical truths about creation.

The earth is the only inhabitable planet in our solar system for life forms that we know of from recent observation. Environments for life support do not exist on any of the other planets.

We find that there is much evidence of death, decay, and destruction of very old life forms buried beneath the earth's surface.

Large reptilian creatures have been found that existed before humans of our kind were created. There is no record of the existence of these creatures in scripture.

Their huge size and the impact they would have had on humanity would be there for sure. One should conclude that these creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.

We can also observe an apparent long term decadent entropic decline of life forms from the fossil remains of these creatures and many others.

This decline was part of their life cycle and this is different than what one would expect of the Lord's original creation. Something motivated Him to cause this process of entropy and death to operate in His universe.

There is also an apparent desire by the Lord to create new heavens and an earth in the future which will be eternally perfect. This change will involve a return to the conditions of His original and perfect creation. [Romans 8:18-22; Revelation 21]

The original creation was balanced, stable, and perfected. For example we are told that satan was created perfect in every way. [Ezekiel 28:12-19]

One can then conclude from this that the rebellion of satan and one third of the angels resulted in the Lord's judgment and subsequent decline of the original creation.

It does appear to us that the other planets and moons in our solar system had environments similar to the earth in the distant past.

If the earth is the same age as the others and all were created in the beginning before Genesis 1:2, then one could speculate that satan's fall resulted in the Lord's widespread judgment of the material universe.

This would bring us to Genesis 1:2 and the following reconditioning of the earth for the habitation of living life forms, with no similar adjustments to any of the other planets and moons.

Genesis 1:2 opens with an earth that is void of all living life forms and has experienced significant upheaval and destruction. One should ponder this and view the Lord's actions from the perspective of being located on the earth.

We could speculate that the Lord's initial phase of the judgment process was to freeze the earth and cover it with ice. This would explain the "ice age" that we have observed. All life forms on the earth were destroyed in the process.

A warming of the earth would then produce the water cover [waters below] and the water vapor [waters above] as described in Genesis. The earth is described as being desolated and totally covered with surface waters.

The space immediately above the waters is saturated with thick water vapors (dense clouds). There is no visibility, everything was in total darkness on the earth.

The sun, moon, earth's solar system, and universe were present, but these could not be seen from the earth. They were created in the beginning long before Genesis 1:2 and were made visible again from the earth by the Lord's reconditioning actions.

The time is about 6,000 years ago and He moved rapidly to prepare the desolated earth for the habitation of life forms including the initial introduction of humans of our kind. [Genesis 1:2]

His actions begin in Genesis 1:3. He dissipates enough of the cloud mass (waters above) above the surface waters so that a faint glow of light coming from the sun can be seen.

The statement "let there be light" is not a creative act, but the result of the dissipation process.

Light was created in the beginning when He created the heavens and the earth, but obscured by the conditions of judgment.

The dissipation process allowed for one to observe day and night because of the rotation of the earth and enough light from the sun.

He then separated the waters above from the waters below and formed the atmosphere between them. This was necessary for the support of the new life forms that were to come.

Next He caused the surface waters on the earth to recede to the extent that dry land appeared in various areas.

Natural vegetation seed that already existed in the earth began to grow and reproduce at an accelerated rate.

Further dissipation of the atmospheric cloud mass allowed for observation of the sun, moon, and stars from the earth. He made these to be lights appearing in the atmosphere by observation from the earth's surface and for distinct purposes.

He created them in the beginning long before 6,000 years ago, but made them appear and function for the reconditioned earth.

[Truth Files]

Response to the OP continued .....

Next He created new life forms to replace those destroyed by His former judgment of the earth. These were distinctly different creatures who multiply only in kind and in distinct habitations. They are very much like the ones living on the earth today.

Earlier life forms that existed prior to the Lord's judgment of the earth were similar but also included creatures that He did not replace.

Evidence of these extinct life forms are found in the fossil discoveries today like large reptilian creatures.

Dinosaurs existed before Genesis 1:2 and they were not replaced by the Lord when He created the new life forms recorded in Genesis 1:20-26.

Claims have been made in modern times that some of these still exist, but they are not convincing.

There has been speculation that two creatures described in the book of Job are dinosaurs which coexisted with humans and lived in Job's day.

Careful analysis of behemoth and leviathan as they are described leads to a very different conclusion. [Job 40:15-24, 41:1-34]

The first one is the manatee, or dugong, and the second one is the legendary crocodile. Neither of these should be confused with the dinosaurs of the pre-Adamite earth.

Manatees are aquatic air breathing mammals who spend much of their time eating marsh and under water grasses. The Biblical description says that behemoth eats grass like the ox.

The manatee has a very large unique tail which can rotate in any direction and is used to propel it through the water.

The design of the tail, very strong diaphragm muscles, and sensitive snout feelers used for detection in searching for food are described in scripture.

The creature's rear appendages are merged together internally to form its multi-directional tail. This provides the power and flexibility for the large manatee to move through the water at amazing speed.

Movement of the tail is much like the movement of a large tree swaying in the wind. The statement "it moves its tail like a cedar" is used to describe this action.

They have large thick tails. The largest manatee on record in modern times is about 3,500 pounds.

This creature also has the densest bones of any other known animal. The bones have no marrow and are exceptionally strong.

The bones are so dense and thick that when the manatee expounds enough air from its lungs, it sinks immediately to the bottom of the water like a submarine. This bone structure is described in Scripture.

The Manatee has a very humble spirit and is described in contrast to leviathan who is mean spirited and aggressive.

Behemoth's temperament is described as the "chief ways of the Lord", or primary and receptive behavior. Leviathan displays the opposite trait of His latent wrath.

Manatees inhabited costal waters of the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and associated river systems like the Jordan in Job's day. This is the Biblical description of the manatee (dugong, sea cow).

The description of leviathan is a dead ringer for the crocodile. This creature has both a larger pre-Adamite fossil record and a more recent smaller version which is described in the book of Job.

Even the smaller version of this obnoxious reptilian is extremely dangerous and highly implacable.

They are at the top of the food chain and known for their fearless aggressive behavior. The Bible's description is accurate and appropriate.

The sparks, fire, and smoke that proceed from his mouth are symbolic of his great wrath when he is in attack mode. He does not actually produce the sparks, fire, and smoke, but one might think so if ever confronted by this killing machine.

The crocodile's angry, relentless, and sudden attack is very much like the Lord's wrath in judgment which is often described with symbolic fire and brimstone.

The Lord's final act associated with the reconditioning of the earth about 6,000 years ago was the creation of human kind. We are distinctly different from all of the other living creatures including the angelic beings.

We are spirits with physical bodies created in His own image. No other beings of his creation have this distinction.

[mfblume]

Excellent point, I never looked at it that way. So do you subscribe to the probability of a primordial flood (from God's wrath, like Noah's flood) during the "gap".

Yes I do. In fact that is why God promised Noah there would be no more flooding. Noah might stop and think to himself why God would ever say that if Noah's flood was the only one that ever occurred. But if this was the SECOND flood, then it gives more impact for God to make the promise.

[Aquila]

Here's an issue for me with regards to the Gap Theory...

While the Gap Theory appears to offer an interpretation to allow for an ancient earth... science decries the very possibility of a global catastrophe that allegedly occured prior to Genesis 1:2.

So it seeks to please science and accept scientific data... by claiming something that science has found absolutely no evidence for.

[Truth Files]

"Yes I do. In fact that is why God promised Noah there would be no more flooding. Noah might stop and think to himself why God would ever say that if Noah's flood was the only one that ever occurred. But if this was the SECOND flood, then it gives more impact for God to make the promise."

Good point ....I agree .... the earth was covered with a pre-Adamite deluge as the result of a prior judgment [most likely the same judgment against satan and his fallen ones] [2Peter 3:3-7]

[Truth Files]

"While the Gap Theory appears to offer an interpretation to allow for an ancient earth... science decries the very possibility of a global catastrophe that allegedly occured prior to Genesis 1:2."

I doubt that those who claim this can prove it

...... but we can know that the Bible has the real deal

[acerrak]

many christian archelogist and scientist, would disagree with your gap truth Files and many would agree with you

Though your Interpretations is welcomed. I personally dont agree with it.

One archeologist talked about the cone theory, and he did this to refute evolutionist, but in this the earth sediment which is all over the world , as we both agree would represent the Flood, really isnt that Old.

Though when carbon dating dino bones there not that old as well either. and so they do not recognize carbon dating and what science does is give them a predetermened rock date, that science has formulated.

There have been archelogical finds with dinasours on pottery drawings, artworks etc. and this with cutlures 2000+ years old. These dinosaurs (which got there name in the 1940-50's) was visually seen in order to make artworf of them.

Dino and human foot prints found together.

I believe the dinos were killed off in the Flood.

Is it possible to have a gap theory sure it is. But again i believe this is why God gave us ages of the people so we could look back and have some calculation.

though you did work on the manatee i dont think the tail represented in job would fit the description just my personal opinion.

[mfblume]

Here's an issue for me with regards to the Gap Theory...

While the Gap Theory appears to offer an interpretation to allow for an ancient earth... science decries the very possibility of a global catastrophe that allegedly occured prior to Genesis 1:2.

So it seeks to please science and accept scientific data... by claiming something that science has found absolutely no evidence for.

The evidence is the ice age. Take away the sun and cover the world with water... ice age.

[Truth Files]

"The evidence is the ice age. Take away the sun and cover the world with water... ice age"

I would agree .... freeze the planet .... eliminate all life forms

Warm up the planet ..... covered with the great deep

[acerrak]

The evidence is the ice age. Take away the sun and cover the world with water... ice age.

is there really any proof of the ice age.? Bible said he parted the waters not ice.

[Bowas]

the Bible said He formed man, not a baby. . He created a man . a Baby would not be able to tend anything. they would need to be fed etc etc. But God made man and said its Good and put him into the Garden to eat of the fruit. take care of the garden

i belive this is why we have the ages of adam and his sons through passing generations.


Not directed at you mike but general
also something that lived supposedly millions of years ago, can be found on 2000 year old pottery. Im pretty sure its something they visual saw, and made images of

Gen 2:7 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 soul.
Two points here. God "formed" man. Doesn't say how long He took to "form" him from the dust of the earth. Forming is a process and implies a period of time to accomplish. Nothing about *poof* *abra cadabra*, *presto* here is man! It says God "formed". And after He "formed" man, man "became" a living soul. This is the same word as in Gen 1:2 renderd "was" (haw-yaw').
For something to "become" something, it must not have always been what it "became". It was either something else or incomplete prior to it "becoming" what it currently has "become". In this case, man "became" a "living soul" indicating Man was not a "living soul" prior to God breathing the breath of life allowing man to become a living soul. Before that, Man did not have a "living soul" but man was still "formed" by God from the "dust of the earth." Elements, chemicals, water etc.

[Bowas]

is there really any proof of the ice age.? Bible said he parted the waters not ice.

There is ample proof of ice ages. No, the bible does not indicate it, but the Bible does not tell everything God did in His creation. My goodness, could you imagine how big the bible would be if He told us everything he did?
The "days" of creation are not a detailed account, just the general account of what he did and in the order He did it.
T-rex is not mentioned in the Bible, yet they did exist. Right?

[Truth Files]

"Though your Interpretations is welcomed. I personally dont agree with it"

I believe that the dinosaurs existed before Genesis 1:2 and not after ..... the Lord just did not replace these life forms when He re-conditioned the earth about 6,000 years ago for the purpose of setting up an environment for humans of our kind made in His image .... a first

If there were huge reptilian creatures on the earth during the time lapse of about 1000 years between Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 6 [the flood] these would be recorded in the scriptures during the same period .... they are not

The first humans had a much longer life span during the period and would have definitely had encounters with the monster reptiles .... there is no record of the same in the related scriptures

I have more information on this subject and will post it soon

[Bowas]

"Though your Interpretations is welcomed. I personally dont agree with it"

I believe that the dinosaurs existed before Genesis 1:2 and not after ..... the Lord just did not replace these life forms when He re-conditioned the earth about 6,000 years ago for the purpose of setting up an environment for humans of our kind made in His image .... a first

If there were huge reptilian creatures on the earth during the time lapse of about 1000 years between Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 6 [the flood] these would be recorded in the scriptures during the same period .... they are not

The first humans had a much longer life span during the period and would have definitely had encounters with the monster reptiles .... there is no record of the same in the related scriptures

I have more information on this subject and will post it soon

Not sure about all your interpetation, but as you said, "Though your Interpretations is welcomed. I personally dont agree with it" ;)
Kangaroos are not mentioned anywhere in the Bible, yet we know they did and do exist. Just because something is not mentioned, does not mean it did not exist. Were the dinos here after Adam? Don't know. they may have already gone extinct prior to Adam and perhaps during the Gap. That's fine.
Oh. Where did you get this information, "the time lapse of about 1000 years between Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 6 [the flood]"

[mfblume]

is there really any proof of the ice age.? Bible said he parted the waters not ice.

Ice age is too obvious with or without what biblical record there is.

[Bowas]

Science contains too many flaws for me to give it much weight. They change too much. The more they study the more they correct themselves and find their own findings to be wrong.

But, by your own admission, they will change their views when proven wrong. I know some that refuse to alter or adjust any of their positions regardless of any evidence Scientifically OR Biblically.
It is not a violation of God's word to change our views as we learn more of his word which quite often is not always the way it was handed down to us via tradition.
What I have found is if one studies the scriptures, one finds science and the Bible do not really have that many disagreements.
True, some scientists refuse to believe most things Bible and some Bible believers have a real hard time accepting things scientificly, both are the losers and narrow minded.
The Bible and science are not contrary to each other.

[Truth Files]

"Where did you get this information, "the time lapse of about 1000 years between Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 6 [the flood]"

If you study the aging of the generations of Israel presented in the O.T. you can determine that there has been about 6000 years [prophetic years] since Genesis 1:2

1000 years: human creation to the flood

1000 years: flood to Abraham

1000 years: Abraham to David

1000 years: David to Jesus Christ

2000 years: Jesus Christ to the present

[Bowas]

"Where did you get this information, "the time lapse of about 1000 years between Genesis 1:2 and Genesis 6 [the flood]"

If you study the aging of the generations of Israel presented in the O.T. you can determine that there has been about 6000 years [prophetic years] since Genesis 1:2

1000 years: human creation to the flood

1000 years: flood to Abraham

1000 years: Abraham to David

1000 years: David to Jesus Christ

2000 years: Jesus Christ to the present

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Not sure where you see "human creation" in Gen 1:2 and to conclude there is 1000 years from gen 1:2 until the flood. Not seeing your connection here as Humans had not yet been formed at this point, that I can see.

[Truth Files]

Humans were created on the 6th 24 hour day

This time lapse of His setting out to recondition the earth after His previous judgment begins with Genesis 1:2 .... one can then track the aging of the humans recorded to the flood ..... about 1000 years [in fact some of them had life spans close to this time value]

Let me say this: the natural man cannot understand the Bible .... one must possess His Holy Spirit in the study, if not, it simply will not happen

The stand off between the Bible's account of creation and the many theories of human design like evolution will continue until the Lord's closes the story, and then all will know the truth .... both those saved for eternity .... and those unsaved and lost forever

The authenticity of the claims made in scripture that the Bible is in fact the word of the living God can be proven by the study and correct rendering of the prophetic scriptures .... and the Bible is the only reliable source given to humans for knowing the truth about all things that He has conveyed

[Truth Files]

Response to the OP continued .....

The Lord's extend plans and purposes for the human are eternal and future from the present. We are creatures with independent wills and must choose our ultimate destiny.

The first humans of our kind were Adam and Eve, and the Lord placed them in a special place on earth called the garden of Eden where they enjoyed the His presence.

There is also another garden of Eden associated with mountain of the Lord [the symbol of His government], and the garden is His perfect universe

Adam and Eve knew that he created them and at first they obeyed His perfect direction and providence for living in harmony with His creation and associated environment.

It is not known today exactly where the garden of Eden on the earth was located, but there is a convergence of four rivers recorded in Genesis that apparently flowed from the area.

They are the Pison, Gihon, Hiddekel [Tigris], and Euphrates. The last two of these rivers flow south and east from northeastern Turkey, and northern Iraq. [Genesis 10:2-14]

It is believed that the Pison flowed southward toward Arabia and the Gihon flowed northward toward the original Asian branch of the land of Cush [northern Iraq].

There is possible identification of these other two rivers today, although there are more than four rivers in the area and Noah's flood may have adjusted their courses.

This area is also close to Noah's landing on the mountains of Ararat after the Lord's judgment of the flood approximately 1,000 years later.

The Euphrates is the river that will dry up at the time of the end of this present age to make way for the armies of the kings of the east headed for the battle of Armageddon. [Revelation 16:12]

It is significant to note that the focus of the Bible prophecies just prior to the second advent of the Lord is in the area where human existence began and continued just after the flood. [Genesis 10:1-11; 11:1-9]

I believe that this same area today is well worth watching by the student of Bible prophecy as related to the coming time of the end of this present age. [Psalms 83; Isaiah 11; Jeremiah 30; Ezekiel 36,37,38,39; Daniel 2:31-45; 7:7-27; 8:9; 11:36-45; 12:1-7; Micah4; 5; Zechariah 14; Luke 21]

Much of the far distant history of the earth, our solar system, and Lord's endless universe is not revealed in scripture. There are only a few direct insights given and the rest has to be contemplated by the reader.

One can formulate a broader picture by deductive reason and indirect application of scriptural texts under the guidance of His Holy Spirit. We must also realize that there is much the Lord has not and does not reveal to us at this time.

If one considers that His original creation was perfect and complete in every way, then one must ponder why it is not so now. What would have caused Him to set His creation on a course of entropy, decay, and death ?

Why did He warn the first humans about 6,000 years ago of the existence and presence of evil and give His command to avoid the same ? Scripture has some information to consider. [Genesis 2:16-17]

We are told about satan's rebellion against the Lord and his resultant fall which is specifically recorded in scripture. [Isaiah 14:12; Ezekiel 28:12 Revelation 12:3-4; 12:7-12]

We also get the impression that this angelic creature was himself a perfect creation in the beginning.

If we could look at the past of a pre-Adamite earth as being corrupted by satan and his fallen angels we might see a planet, solar system, and beyond with very strange and despicable habitations.

One example would be the blood thirsty world of the flesh eating reptiles that we find in the fossil records today.

Where did these creatures come from and why would he Lord create and allow them to exist over extended periods of time on the earth ?

The answer may be that these were satanic corruptions of altered genetic material life forms. This is most likely why satan is often referred to as an ancient serpent or dragon in scripture.

Would the Lord have allowed satan and his angels to manufacture these hideous creatures for fun and games on the earth and other planets ? He may have until He decided to bring this activity it to a halt.

Could satan have been allowed to alter genetic DNA for producing his gladiator lizards for sport ?

Humans have discovered this process of DNA manipulation today and are doing it to some degree. If we can, then it is very possible that satan had the ability to do the same to a much greater extent.

There is no telling what this angelic creature and his followers were doing in the long distant past after their rebellion against the Lord.

If left alone to experiment, he could very well have been the inventor of a very strange and deadly world that one would not want to visit.

I am speculating about these things, but the more significant question might be, what was the Lord's reaction to the rebellion of satan and 1/3 of all of the angels ?

I think the answer relates to the observable conditions of decay and death found in the fossil records, and the massive upheaval of the earth's crust.

Genesis 1:2 states that the earth was at the time totally covered by the great deep and in total darkness. All life forms on the surface and in the waters had been eliminated.

The Lord would surely react to satan's venture to show him that his actions were folly and doomed to failure. His response was devastating and on a scale of universal proportion including the earth.

[Truth Files]

Response to the OP continues .....

He moved to strip satan of his interactions with and habitations of the material universe to the maximum degree. This left satan with a total loss of his trusted position of power, authority, and the free use of the Lord's creations.

Scriptures related to satan's fall reflect this very possibility and we can find these in Isaiah chapter 14, and Ezekiel 28.

The Lord's initial and perfect universe was inhabited by the angelic realm in the beginning and included vast arrays of His perfect creative works. Included were endless places of habitation with all kinds of interesting life forms.

The angels were created just before that of the material universe. We know this because they observed His creative processes.

God speaks in Job chapter 38:

"Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth,
where are the foundations fastened,
who laid the corner stone,
when the morning stars sang together
and the sons of God shouted for joy ?"
[Job 38:4-7]

We are told in Scripture that Satan was originally a covering cherub of the highest order of angels. He was given great authority, responsibilities, and the use of the Lord's creations.

Satan walked, and still does walk, among the stones of fire [heavenly bodies, stars, and planets].

His walk today is one in desperation since the universe is a very hostile place and his opportunities are very limited.

Most of his focus is now and has been on the earth since the creation of humans of our kind and his objective is always to destroy them by any means possible. Satan hates the idea of future human immortality.

He will be confined to the earth with no further access to the heavenly dimensions at the time of the end of this present age. His visitation will be violent and extremely destructive before his is captured and sent to the abyss. [Revelation 12, 20]

Satan was initially upon the Lord's holy mountain [His government] before his rebellion and had a position at a very high level in the Lord's universal government.

A day came when the Lord found satan abusing his granted and vaulted position and it was all down hill for him from that time forward.

He found iniquity, pride, arrogance, and greed in satan's behavior. Satan may have been hiding his ambitions, but did not hide his actions.

He was apparently engaged in using his position, authority, and personal attributes to possess and distribute the wealth of the Lord's material universe for his own gain by any means including violence.

His market place was the entire universe which was created in perfection and included great material wealth and blessings from the Lord. Satan's merchandising was the beginning of his down fall.

This behavior corrupted satan and pushed him further to the extent that he challenged the Lord's position and as creator and ruler of the universe. He then set out to rebel against Him and to replace Him.

This is what satan said regarding his intentions:

"I will ascend into heaven"

"I will exalt my throne above the stars of God"

"I will sit upon the mountain of the congregations"

"I will ascend above the clouds and be like the most High"
[Isaiah 14:13-14]

For this the Lord cast him out of his original position in His government and He will ultimately destroy satan so that he will no longer walk freely among the stones of fire [heavenly bodies, stars, and planets].

The Lord began His judgment process sometime between the rebellion of satan and 1/3 of the angelic realm and the reconditioning of the earth about 6,000 years ago.

He brought darkness, disorder, and destruction to satan's valued habitations in order to punish him for his pride, arrogance, and rebellion. The earth and related solar system was affected in the process.

The planet Mars appears that it was a habitation of ancient life forms and it has not been restored like the earth. The earth has been uniquely reconditioned while the others of the solar system are still uninhabitable.

There is evidence of forces much greater than that of Noah's flood which altered and twisted the earth's topography at some time in the far distant past.

There is also evidence of the existence of life forms over an enormous period of time which reflect entropy, decay, and death before the Lord's renovation of the earth just 6,000 years ago.

Genesis 1:2 gives us a picture of an earth that had been visited by the Lord with devastating destructive forces for the purpose of dealing with satan's intransigence.

He was not willing to allow satan and his followers to exercise unmitigated and unlimited corruption of His universe in their fallen state of rebellion.

Genesis 1:3 tells us that the Lord then moved to recondition the earth for the habitation of human beings who were to be created in His own image.

This unique creature would be His centerpiece with an ultimate journey to inhabit new heavens and a new earth which He will produce in the future. [Genesis 1:26-27; Revelation 7:9-17; 21:1-7; 22:1-5]

[acerrak]

Gen 2:7 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 soul.
Two points here. God "formed" man. Doesn't say how long He took to "form" him from the dust of the earth. Forming is a process and implies a period of time to accomplish. Nothing about *poof* *abra cadabra*, *presto* here is man! It says God "formed". And after He "formed" man, man "became" a living soul. This is the same word as in Gen 1:2 renderd "was" (haw-yaw').
For something to "become" something, it must not have always been what it "became". It was either something else or incomplete prior to it "becoming" what it currently has "become". In this case, man "became" a "living soul" indicating Man was not a "living soul" prior to God breathing the breath of life allowing man to become a living soul. Before that, Man did not have a "living soul" but man was still "formed" by God from the "dust of the earth." Elements, chemicals, water etc.

yea but still doesnt mean he created a baby. He could have used the word child or baby to describe it but instead he chose man. He also formed eve pretty much the same day. eve was a abra cadabra, comming from Adams rib, and thus was formed.

God formed adam as a man and not a baby

[acerrak]

There is ample proof of ice ages. No, the bible does not indicate it, but the Bible does not tell everything God did in His creation. My goodness, could you imagine how big the bible would be if He told us everything he did?
The "days" of creation are not a detailed account, just the general account of what he did and in the order He did it.
T-rex is not mentioned in the Bible, yet they did exist. Right?

dinos didnt get the name until 1950 but we see the word serpents.

Serpents could walk until God cursed them to crawl on their bellies.
also the bible mentions unicorns as well.

many time over science has to rebound from archeology. just like the human toothe being found in jerusalem. making it the oldest homo sapien fragment ever found. and instead of having people come out of africa as they assumed until the dating is set. again they will have to rework all that.

[Bowas]

Humans were created on the 6th 24 hour day I LOOKED BUT COULDN'T SCRIPTURE TO SUPPORT THAT.

This time lapse of His setting out to recondition the earth after His previous judgment begins with Genesis 1:2 .... one can then track the aging of the humans recorded to the flood ..... about 1000 years [in fact some of them had life spans close to this time value]

Let me say this: the natural man cannot understand the Bible .... one must possess His Holy Spirit in the study, if not, it simply will not happen.
I HAVE THE HOLY SPIRIT. IN FACT, I AM KNOWN AS "BOWAS", BORN OF WATER AND SPIRIT.
The stand off between the Bible's account of creation and the many theories of human design like evolution (AND LIKE THE EARTH IS THE ABSOLUTE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE SUN, MOON AND STARS REVOLVE AROUND IT THAT WAS INSISTED ON BY "THE CHURCH" OF YESTERYEAR?) will continue until the Lord's closes the story, and then all will know the truth .... both those saved for eternity .... and those unsaved and lost forever
OK.
The authenticity of the claims made in scripture that the Bible is in fact the word of the living God can be proven by the study and correct rendering of the prophetic scriptures (YOUR CORRECT RENDERING I ASSUME ;)) .... and the Bible is the only reliable source given to humans for knowing the truth about all things that He has conveyed. AGREED!
My comments are in CAPS, not for yelling but just so they stand out. :)

[Bowas]

dinos didnt get the name until 1950 but we see the word serpents.
Serpents could walk until God cursed them to crawl on their bellies.
also the bible mentions unicorns as well.

many time over science has to rebound from archeology. just like the human toothe being found in jerusalem. making it the oldest homo sapien fragment ever found. and instead of having people come out of africa as they assumed until the dating is set. again they will have to rework all that.

Serpents=Dinos? Seriously? You are grasping? Try Serpents= Snakes/vipers. :thumbsup
I do not think science is correct on everything, but neither do I discount everything they come up with just because it may not fit into what I had previously thought. Regardless of the subject we MUST be capable of allowing more truth to enter into our beliefs.

[acerrak]

Serpents=Dinos? Seriously? You are grasping? Try Serpents= Snakes/vipers. :thumbsup
I do not think science is correct on everything, but neither do I discount everything they come up with just because it may not fit into what I had previously thought. Regardless of the subject we MUST be capable of allowing more truth to enter into our beliefs.

have you ever viewed the inca stones?

no i wasnt grasping. i was just pointing out that snakes today either had legs and feet to walk on in the Garden which could be like a dragon to a certain extent, but once cursed was made to crawl on the bellie.

[Bowas]

yea but still doesnt mean he created a baby. He could have used the word child or baby to describe it but instead he chose man. He also formed eve pretty much the same day. eve was a abra cadabra, comming from Adams rib, and thus was formed.

God formed adam as a man and not a baby

Didn't say He formed a baby. Babies are formed in their mothers womb, which takes time and a mother. How long did it take God to form man from the dust of the earth which is where we all came from. Right?
Notice this verse...
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

This comes before the verse where we find God forming man and breathing into him the breath of life.

Gen 2:7 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 soul.
Man(kind) is the finished product of Gods creation for man(kind), but we do find "male and female created he them", not just "Male".
Once again, you are making an assumption that Eve was created on the same day, which I assume you mean to be a 24 hour period of time.
Yes. She was created in the same day, but nothing states it was in a single 24 hour period of time, just some derived conclusions that may or may not be true.

[Bowas]

have you ever viewed the inca stones?

no i wasnt grasping. i was just pointing out that snakes today either had legs and feet to walk on in the Garden which could be like a dragon to a certain extent, but once cursed was made to crawl on the bellie.

Assumptions the best I can tell by you using the words, "could be" which is much of what I am claiming. Assumptions. True, I make some assumptions, but my assumptions make sense. hahah!

[acerrak]

Didn't say He formed a baby. Babies are formed in their mothers womb, which takes time and a mother. How long did it take God to form man from the dust of the earth which is where we all came from. Right?
Notice this verse...
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

This comes before the verse where we find God forming man and breathing into him the breath of life.

Gen 2:7 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 soul.
Man(kind) is the finished product of Gods creation for man(kind), but we do find "male and female created he them", not just "Male".
Once again, you are making an assumption that Eve was created on the same day, which I assume you mean to be a 24 hour period of time.
Yes. She was created in the same day, but nothing states it was in a single 24 hour period of time, just some derived conclusions that may or may not be true.

God Formed man and he came alive the same day. I dont believe this process took time.

as with these verses if you get into the judaism study there was another woman envolved lilyth or something like that, and would eventually be the one who would reproduce the mixed breed offspring with fallen angels and such.

I believe however That God formed adam, and that God made eve from adam,
I dont believe God formed adam over a 1000 years of bio chemistry

[Bowas]

God Formed man and he came alive the same day. I dont believe this process took time.
WHY NOT? DOESN'T GOD USE THE NATURE HE CREATED TO ACCOMPLISH HIS WILL? NATURE DOES WHAT HE COMMANDS THEM OR DESIGNED THEM TO DO. IF HE CREATED NATURE TO ACCOMPLISH HIS CREATION OVER UNTOLD NUMBER OF YEARS, IT IS BY HIS DESIGN. WHO ARE WE TO SAY HE COULDN'T/DIDN'T DO IT THAT WAY. HIS WAYS ARE NOT OUR WAYS.
as with these verses if you get into the judaism study there was another woman envolved lilyth or something like that, and would eventually be the one who would reproduce the mixed breed offspring with fallen angels and such.
DON'T PUT MUCH STOCK IN JUDAISM AND THEIR MYSTICAL EXPLAINATIONS.

I believe however That God formed adam, and that God made eve from adam,
I dont believe God formed adam over a 1000 years of bio chemistry

CAPS are my words.

[acerrak]

CAPS are my words.

cause he gave us days at creation in the book of genesis, and not 1000 of years.
cause on the 7th he rested. Not 7000 years on the 7th day, and thus why he had israel keep the 7th day as a sabbath to remember creation, and the exodus of egypt.

its Things like these that show Gods Power, and he didnt create nature to make his creation.

He created creation and Nature just as he said he Did, in the time frame of the Bible. I dont question His power. Im simply going off what the Bible states.

6 days of work 7th day He rested from creation.

[Bowas]

cause he gave us days at creation in the book of genesis, and not 1000 of years.
cause on the 7th he rested. Not 7000 years on the 7th day, and thus why he had israel keep the 7th day as a sabbath to remember creation, and the exodus of egypt.

its Things like these that show Gods Power, and he didnt create nature to make his creation.

He created creation and Nature just as he said he Did, in the time frame of the Bible. I dont question His power. Im simply going off what the Bible states.

6 days of work 7th day He rested from creation.

I don't question the "days" of creation as being the order of the creative process. What I do not see, is that a creative day is 24 hour length of time or even 1000 year period of time, but rather just a period of time which the Bible does not specify the length of the creative "days" just the order in which God created creation, and by science and observation of God's creation, the earth is very very old.

[acerrak]

I don't question the "days" of creation as being the order of the creative process. What I do not see, is that a creative day is 24 hour length of time or even 1000 year period of time, but rather just a period of time which the Bible does not specify the length of the creative "days" just the order in which God created creation, and by science and observation of God's creation, the earth is very very old.

we arrive at 2 different conclusions and that is ok.

[Godsdrummer]

I don't question the "days" of creation as being the order of the creative process. What I do not see, is that a creative day is 24 hour length of time or even 1000 year period of time, but rather just a period of time which the Bible does not specify the length of the creative "days" just the order in which God created creation, and by science and observation of God's creation, the earth is very very old.


That is so not true!!! It is only one view of science that the earth is very very old. There are many that feel the earth is very very young, in fact only about 7 to 10 thousand years. I chalange you to check out the presentation that they have about Mnt St Helens in Washington State. the volcano that erupted in the early eighty's. You can see by how the area around the volcano changed in just one year. I will have to find the web address but the fact remains that there are several books that make more sense than the idea of evolutoin or gapt theorys etc. as to how the earth is very young.

[Aquila]

I just believe Genesis literally. I believe that we are the keepers of an ancient and long forgotten knowledge regarding our world's beginnings. I don't believe that science can be trusted to be accurate when it comes to various theories. I mean... for thousands of years they said that the earth was in the center of the universe. Then they changed their position upon discovery of the truth. They said the earth was flat... and then again they found the truth to be otherwise. They believed in the steady state theory of origins, and now with current data they embrace the Big Bang theory. They told me eggs were bad for me... now researchers say they're good for me. Researchers told me apples were good for me... now they tell me they are bad for me.

The Bible never changes and is absolutely right the first time, every time. If we force Scripture to agree with the science of today... we'll have to turn around and force it to fit some new fangled theory that will be dreamed up tomorrow.

It's supernatural. It's a mystery. It's a long forgotten and largely disregarded (or spiritually hidden) truth about our origins. And God has entrusted us to keep this truth and teach it to the church.

[Falla39]

I think about when a woman becomes with child, there is a period of nine months for
the normal or assigned process to be completed. With animals, the period is much shorter.

The second Adam, Jesus Christ, was born of a woman, fathered by the Holy Spirit. He
was born in due time, went with his parents to Egypt, came back, etc. Learned to be
a carpenter from his earthly father, Joseph. When he was about 30 yrs old, his earthly
ministry began. He was baptized by John, the Baptist, his cousin. John decreased and
Jesus increased in stature and in wisdom. It was all a process, set up by the Father.

Jesus didn't come to earth as a man. but a babe. At twelve he amazed the docters and
lawyers in the temple. But it was not time at twelve for his earthly ministry. He submitted
to his earthly parents until he became a man.(about 30 yrs old).

I believe we would do well to go by the pattern of our Savior. Paul said when he was a
child, he spake as a child, thought as a child, understood as a child, BUT when he became
a MAN (mature), he put away childish things. There's a message in that statemenet!

Why did Jesus tell Nicodemas that a MAN must be born again. Not a baby, a child. I
have wondered about children receiving the Holy Ghost at a very young age. If we, as
has been reported, losing about 75-80 percent of our young people to the world, the
question is WHY! I am speaking of a process shown by example by our Lord. He was not
ready at twelve. He was not a MAN at twelve. He was doing his Father's Will at twelve
because he submitted to his earthly parents. The Bible tells us that "though a son, yet
learned he obedience by the things he suffered".

Parents are to "train up a child in the way he/she SHOULD go". Then when they get older,
they will know which way they ought to go. Could it be that many times children
are "let go" too soon!
What does this have to do with this thread! I am speaking of a process. God set things in
order. A process of time. A WAITING PERIOD! GOD'S ORDER of that which HE has made or
created.

Jesus didn't tell Nicodemas that a young child must be born again. He said a MAN (mature)
MUST be born again, Else they cannot SEE or ENTER the Kingdom of GOD. I wonder if MAN
hasn't rushed TOO many things, instead of following GOD'S ORDER, WILL and WAY!

Why look to Genesis. Why not look to the NEW Testament and follow the example GOD showed,
through the pattern of His SON.
John 1:1, "In the beginning.....

Falla39

[acerrak]

Cause Falla the topic is creation, and we are discussing the days that God created Earth.
Which in itself is a shadow.

We need to have our Kids rooted into page one as well. If not when they get to school and evolution is taught there gonna get confused on what actually happened.

Creation was so important to God that He gave the sabbath to Israel, as a rememberance of Creation and there exodus of Egypt.

also Israel was also having to answer for the 70 years of sabbaths missed in captivity.

Im not taking anything away from the cross. Infact the &th day God rested we to can enter that Rest. Jesus said come unto me all who labor and i will give you rest. rest for your soul.

So this is a very important topic. like all topic from the bible. John gives us a picture of Jesus deity and also how He was involved in creation itself with His Father.

[Falla39]

The Old Covenant Concealed, in The New Covenant is being Revealed.

The Law was given for transgression until the "Seed", Jesus Christ would come.
In the New Covenant, HE came and IN HIM all things are becoming new! Old things
are passing away. BUT it is still a PROCESS of time. GOD'S TIMING!
Theories are just that!

Falla39

[acerrak]

The Old Covenant Concealed, in The New Covenant is being Revealed.

The Law was given for transgression until the "Seed", Jesus Christ would come.
In the New Covenant, HE came and IN HIM all things are becoming new! Old things
are passing away. BUT it is still a PROCESS of time. GOD'S TIMING!
Theories are just that!

Falla39

the same old earth that was created in Genesis ch 1 is still here. Your living on it. It has not passed away yet. One of these days it will and there will be a new heaven and new earth. But that has not happened.

However the world wasnt made for transgression. The world was made for us. and for us to have a relationship with God. when man sinned the Law came.

even the rabbis of old believed in 6 literal days of creation and on the 7th he rested. The process took 6 days That is the alloted time and process that God planed for His creation. He shows this in The bible.

So i am not following you about this process. God has shown us His process, set a standard for a nation to be testimony for the world. That God created all things, By Him and For Him.

exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Genesis 2:1-2

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

[Bowas]

That is so not true!!! It is only one view of science that the earth is very very old. There are many that feel the earth is very very young, in fact only about 7 to 10 thousand years. I chalange you to check out the presentation that they have about Mnt St Helens in Washington State. the volcano that erupted in the early eighty's. You can see by how the area around the volcano changed in just one year. I will have to find the web address but the fact remains that there are several books that make more sense than the idea of evolutoin or gapt theorys etc. as to how the earth is very young.

I suppose we conclude different opinions on rate of errosion and sedimentary formaions not only of limestone type rocks but the molten rock cooling process to which heavier substances settled and thus forming the layers found not only on the earth but in the earth.
I do understand Mt. St. Helens recovering seems fast but that does not negate the fact that the earth has taken and the nature of it has taken very long to be in the current state it is in. I have even heard some say, "well, errosion may not have been as slow then as it is now" Grasping. IMHO.
Star light visible explaination of young earth theorist is rather amusing. Length of a day equaling 24 hours PRIOR to the sun's existence on the 4th day. There is more, but you see my point. God is no less God if He so chose to have creative days equally millions of years as it does NOT violate His word, just man's interpretation of His word. These are just some of my opinions concluded in my years of considerings and studies on this subject.

[Truth Files]

"I just believe Genesis literally. I believe that we are the keepers of an ancient and long forgotten knowledge regarding our world's beginnings. I don't believe that science can be trusted to be accurate when it comes to various theories. I mean... for thousands of years they said that the earth was in the center of the universe. Then they changed their position upon discovery of the truth. They said the earth was flat... and then again they found the truth to be otherwise. They believed in the steady state theory of origins, and now with current data they embrace the Big Bang theory. They told me eggs were bad for me... now researchers say they're good for me. Researchers told me apples were good for me... now they tell me they are bad for me.

The Bible never changes and is absolutely right the first time, every time. If we force Scripture to agree with the science of today... we'll have to turn around and force it to fit some new fangled theory that will be dreamed up tomorrow.

It's supernatural. It's a mystery. It's a long forgotten and largely disregarded (or spiritually hidden) truth about our origins. And God has entrusted us to keep this truth and teach it to the church."

>No dout about this ..... you have the Lord's correct revealing through His Holy Spirit on the matter

[Bowas]

"I just believe Genesis literally. I believe that we are the keepers of an ancient and long forgotten knowledge regarding our world's beginnings. I don't believe that science can be trusted to be accurate when it comes to various theories. I mean... for thousands of years they said that the earth was in the center of the universe. Then they changed their position upon discovery of the truth. They said the earth was flat... and then again they found the truth to be otherwise. They believed in the steady state theory of origins, and now with current data they embrace the Big Bang theory. They told me eggs were bad for me... now researchers say they're good for me. Researchers told me apples were good for me... now they tell me they are bad for me.

The Bible never changes and is absolutely right the first time, every time. If we force Scripture to agree with the science of today... we'll have to turn around and force it to fit some new fangled theory that will be dreamed up tomorrow.

It's supernatural. It's a mystery. It's a long forgotten and largely disregarded (or spiritually hidden) truth about our origins. And God has entrusted us to keep this truth and teach it to the church."

>No dout about this ..... you have the Lord's correct revealing through His Holy Spirit on the matter

Do remember that the science of yesteryear was greatly influenced and subject to "the church" It was the church back then that would persecute scientist for claiming the earth was not in fact the center of the universe. Talk about revisionist history. Several notable scientists were all but excommunicated for their discoveries to more truth about the earths place in the universe. I contend in the years to come, Chrstians will look back at our period of time with bemusment at our notions of young earth adherists. (My opinions only and not to be construde as an attack on those with opposing views)

[Truth Files]

The "young earth" theory advocates that the Lord made the universe to look old .... this is an absurd idea .... He is not a deceiver

Those who promoted this hoaxed concoction in order to reconcile the Bible's account with scientific discovery are now in disrepute and the following has dwindled .... their objective was to make merchandize out of their story

One does not need to compromise Biblical truth in order to line up with scientific discovery

The solution is very simple: the earth and universe are of extreme age ..... and humans of our kind made in the image of God have only walked the earth for about 6000 years

We are not told in scripture what went on between the original creation and about 6000 years ago

There are a few scriptures that indicate a satanic rebellion and resultant judgment in the undisclosed time lapse

[Bowas]

The "young earth" theory advocates that the Lord made the universe to look old .... this is an absurd idea .... He is not a deceiver

Those who promoted this hoaxed concoction in order to reconcile (THEIR PARTICULAR OPINION) OF the Bible's account with scientific discovery are now in disrepute and the following has dwindled .... their objective was to make merchandize out of their story

One does not need to compromise Biblical truth in order to line up with scientific discovery

The soultion is very simple: the earth and universe are of extreme age ..... and humans of our kind made in the image of God have only walked the earth for about 6000 years

We are not told in scripture what went on between the original creation and about 6000 years ago

There are a few scriptures that indicate a satanic rebellion and resultant judgment in the undisclosed time lapse

I interjected in your post. The Bible is correct, it is just man's understanding of it that at times is not.

[Truth Files]

Some people get it ..... and some people do not

[mfblume]

Here is what one writer proposed:

Creation!

INTRODUCTORY NOTE—A few days ago, our good brother Al Maxey, in his Reflections, Essay #475, issued his reflections on creation and its age. In this issue of Reformation Rumblings, I have lifted a few excerpts from his well-written persuasions and included them as an Attachment to this column. His and my views on creation are at odds, yet we can learn from each other. The following remarks reveal my understanding of creation. Thanks for reading both of us, and please read the “IMPORTANT ENDNOTE” at the bottom of this page.—Buff.

God’s Timetable For Creation

It is taught far and wide that our God did not create our universe in six solar days, but over a period of billions of years. I do not believe He took billions of years—or even millions of years—to create our solar system. Nor do I believe He developed and devised the features of His crowning creation, man, over a period of millions of years, as evolutionists conjecture?

If my perception of the divine testimony is correct (and I stand to be corrected), yom, the Hebrew word for “day,” is defined as a common solar day, beginning with verse five of chapter one. It is employed in the same sense at least 358 times elsewhere in the Old Testament scriptures. There is no logical reason why the first chapter of Genesis would be the exception.

When we contemplate God’s awesome power, there’s hardly any question but that He could have completed His creation in less than six days. “In the beginning” of time, however, He chose to complete His creation in six solar days. The following declaration is either true or false, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens [universe and our solar system] and the Earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11). Many of our common versions say He “rested” on the seventh day. If the first six days consisted of billions of years, so did the seventh day. Does this mean God “rested” for billions of years? (The correct translation, of course, is that God “ceased” creating after the sixth day.)

But another problem with the conception that God utilized billions of years to create everything is that He instructed the Jewish people to rest on the seventh day and keep it holy. If each day consisted of millions of years, were His people to rest millions of years on each seventh “day”? “Day” is employed in the same vein in referring to the seventh as it is used in referring to the other six. Thus whatever we attribute to the first six days, 24-hours or millions of years, we must also attribute to the seventh day. And if each of the six days comprised millions of years, the Jewish people, who were told to rest on the seventh, should have rested for millions of years. Sorry, but we cannot accept this logic.

If we must understand the days of creation figuratively, what is wrong with figuratively understanding the days Jesus’ body was in the tomb—three solar days or millions of years? True, “day” is sometimes used symbolically in the scriptures, but not in relation to creation and the time Jesus’ body was in the tomb.

Could the material from which the Earth and universe were made have existed billions of years? I understand verses one through five of the first chapter of Genesis as the first 24-hour day of creation. It was on this first day that God created the substance from which He formed the universe, created the light, and separated the light from darkness. “And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day” (v. 5). God took a chaotic mass of material He had spoken into existence and fashioned our immaculate universe! Oh, the power of our Creator!

It is claimed that the Hebrew “yom” may also be translated “era” or “epoch,” in addition to “day”? Some Hebrew scholars say yom may be thus translated. There are numerous complexities with this claim, however, when applied to the six days of creation. For if yom is translated “era” or “epoch” and applied to the six days of creation, sea creatures and the birds of the air lived to be millions of years old for they were created before land animals and man. Sea creatures and birds were created on the fifth day; land animals and man were created on the sixth day.

Geologists tell us the Earth is millions of years old and the universe is billions of years old. How do we refute their claim? Perhaps the Earth does appear to be millions of years old, and perhaps the universe appears to be billions of years old. However, if God’s awesome power could create a man (Adam), as opposed to a child, and make him look biologically older than he actually is, could He not create a planet and universe and make both appear older than they actually are? If not, why not?

In September, 2001, National Geographic said their evidence “yields an age for the universe of about 13 billion years.” “About” 13 billion years? They’re not sure! Could they be “about 13 billion years” off? This is the history of evolutionists—speculation, speculation, and more speculation. I suggest they permit God to help them. He says six days. Evolutionists say 13 billion years. I’ll take God’s testimony above the reckless and uncertain testimony of evolutionists and atheists. “Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array” (Genesis 2:1).Buff Scott Jr.

[RandyWayne]

Here is what one writer proposed:

Creation!

INTRODUCTORY NOTE—A few days ago, our good brother Al Maxey, in his Reflections, Essay #475, issued his reflections on creation and its age. In this issue of Reformation Rumblings, I have lifted a few excerpts from his well-written persuasions and included them as an Attachment to this column. His and my views on creation are at odds, yet we can learn from each other. The following remarks reveal my understanding of creation. Thanks for reading both of us, and please read the “IMPORTANT ENDNOTE” at the bottom of this page.—Buff.

God’s Timetable For Creation

It is taught far and wide that our God did not create our universe in six solar days, but over a period of billions of years. I do not believe He took billions of years—or even millions of years—to create our solar system. Nor do I believe He developed and devised the features of His crowning creation, man, over a period of millions of years, as evolutionists conjecture?

If my perception of the divine testimony is correct (and I stand to be corrected), yom, the Hebrew word for “day,” is defined as a common solar day, beginning with verse five of chapter one. It is employed in the same sense at least 358 times elsewhere in the Old Testament scriptures. There is no logical reason why the first chapter of Genesis would be the exception.

When we contemplate God’s awesome power, there’s hardly any question but that He could have completed His creation in less than six days. “In the beginning” of time, however, He chose to complete His creation in six solar days. The following declaration is either true or false, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens [universe and our solar system] and the Earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11). Many of our common versions say He “rested” on the seventh day. If the first six days consisted of billions of years, so did the seventh day. Does this mean God “rested” for billions of years? (The correct translation, of course, is that God “ceased” creating after the sixth day.)

But another problem with the conception that God utilized billions of years to create everything is that He instructed the Jewish people to rest on the seventh day and keep it holy. If each day consisted of millions of years, were His people to rest millions of years on each seventh “day”? “Day” is employed in the same vein in referring to the seventh as it is used in referring to the other six. Thus whatever we attribute to the first six days, 24-hours or millions of years, we must also attribute to the seventh day. And if each of the six days comprised millions of years, the Jewish people, who were told to rest on the seventh, should have rested for millions of years. Sorry, but we cannot accept this logic.

If we must understand the days of creation figuratively, what is wrong with figuratively understanding the days Jesus’ body was in the tomb—three solar days or millions of years? True, “day” is sometimes used symbolically in the scriptures, but not in relation to creation and the time Jesus’ body was in the tomb.

Could the material from which the Earth and universe were made have existed billions of years? I understand verses one through five of the first chapter of Genesis as the first 24-hour day of creation. It was on this first day that God created the substance from which He formed the universe, created the light, and separated the light from darkness. “And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day” (v. 5). God took a chaotic mass of material He had spoken into existence and fashioned our immaculate universe! Oh, the power of our Creator!

It is claimed that the Hebrew “yom” may also be translated “era” or “epoch,” in addition to “day”? Some Hebrew scholars say yom may be thus translated. There are numerous complexities with this claim, however, when applied to the six days of creation. For if yom is translated “era” or “epoch” and applied to the six days of creation, sea creatures and the birds of the air lived to be millions of years old for they were created before land animals and man. Sea creatures and birds were created on the fifth day; land animals and man were created on the sixth day.

Geologists tell us the Earth is millions of years old and the universe is billions of years old. How do we refute their claim? Perhaps the Earth does appear to be millions of years old, and perhaps the universe appears to be billions of years old. However, if God’s awesome power could create a man (Adam), as opposed to a child, and make him look biologically older than he actually is, could He not create a planet and universe and make both appear older than they actually are? If not, why not?

In September, 2001, National Geographic said their evidence “yields an age for the universe of about 13 billion years.” “About” 13 billion years? They’re not sure! Could they be “about 13 billion years” off? This is the history of evolutionists—speculation, speculation, and more speculation. I suggest they permit God to help them. He says six days. Evolutionists say 13 billion years. I’ll take God’s testimony above the reckless and uncertain testimony of evolutionists and atheists. “Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array” (Genesis 2:1).Buff Scott Jr.

Mmmm. 13.75 billion years old. The number is only becoming more and more accurate every year.

Also, when DID these extinction level meteorite craters form if all animals and man were present from nearly the very beginning? There are quite a few of them.

Honestly, it is no wonder that so many leave the Christian faith upon becoming an adult with such bedrock like logic implanted in them from an early age!

[mfblume]

I believe the earth is billions of years old. But I quoted Scott since he showed the days of creation are certainly 24-hour days. I would adjust that and say the creation occurred in verse 1, with a gap of untold millennia or epochs after until verse 2, and the days are RENOVATION rather than creation.

[acerrak]

Some people get it ..... and some people do not

i know its what the other side always thinks about the other side.

[Truth Files]

The believer must be able to take a stand against the folly of men and particularly with regard to the teachings of evolution

This idea has and will keep many from discovering the truth about Jesus Christ and their need to be saved for eternity .... the teaching discounts the authenticity of the Bible and creates doubt in the minds of those who are perishing

[Bowas]

Oh my. Looks Like Bro. Blume and I may have a differece of opinon here. Not saying I am correct in all my conclusion. A few points in this article (which is a good representaion of most young earths positions) that I will bring up a countering point. I am not going to counter this entire article point by point as it would be too lengthy.
Here is what one writer proposed:

Creation!

INTRODUCTORY NOTE—A few days ago, our good brother Al Maxey, in his Reflections, Essay #475, issued his reflections on creation and its age. In this issue of Reformation Rumblings, I have lifted a few excerpts from his well-written persuasions and included them as an Attachment to this column. His and my views on creation are at odds, yet we can learn from each other. The following remarks reveal my understanding of creation. Thanks for reading both of us, and please read the “IMPORTANT ENDNOTE” at the bottom of this page.—Buff.

God’s Timetable For Creation

It is taught far and wide that our God did not create our universe in six solar days, but over a period of billions of years. I do not believe He took billions of years—or even millions of years—to create our solar system. Nor do I believe He developed and devised the features of His crowning creation, man, over a period of millions of years, as evolutionists conjecture?

If my perception of the divine testimony is correct (and I stand to be corrected), yom, the Hebrew word for “day,” is defined as a common solar day, beginning with verse five of chapter one. It is employed in the same sense at least 358 times elsewhere in the Old Testament scriptures. There is no logical reason why the first chapter of Genesis would be the exception.

Gen 2:4 These are "the generations" of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in "the day" (yom)that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

"YOM" DAY IS NOT ALWAYS REFERRING TO A SINGLE 24 HOUR SOLAR DAY. YES, MOST OFTEN IT IS, BECAUSE IT HAPPENS MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE LONGER YOM/DAYS. SOME SAY WE ARE IN "MAN'S DAY" NOW AND IT IS LONGER THAN 24 HOURS. DAY HAS A BROADER MEANING THAN LIMITING IT TO A SINGLE 24 HOUR PERIOD OF TIME. PLEASE NOTICE IN THIS VERSE THE WORD "GENERATIONS" HAS BEEN USED INSTEAD OF THE WORD "DAYS" AS WAS USED IN CHAPTER 1 IN REFERRING TO THE CREATIVE PERIODS OF TIME, SO THE INSISTANCE OF A CREATIVE PERIOD MUST BE A 24 HOUR SOLAR DAY IS QUESTIONABLE. NOTICE TOO, THE COMPLETE CREATIVE PROCESS OF 7 DAYS IS NOW CONDENSED INTO A SINGLE UNIT CALLED "THE DAY". ALL 7 "DAYS" ARE NOW NOT ONLY CALLED "GENERATIONS" BUT THEY ARE TOTALLY JUST CALLED "THE DAY".
When we contemplate God’s awesome power, there’s hardly any question but that He could have completed His creation in less than six days. “In the beginning” of time, however, He chose to complete His creation in six solar days. The following declaration is either true or false, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the Earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11). Many of our common versions say He “rested” on the seventh day. If the first six days consisted of billions of years, so did the seventh day. Does this mean God “rested” for billions of years? (The correct translation, of course, is that God “ceased” creating after the sixth day.)

But another problem with the conception that God utilized billions of years to create everything is that He instructed the Jewish people to rest on the seventh day and keep it holy. If each day consisted of millions of years, were His people to rest millions of years on each seventh “day”? “Day” is employed in the same vein in referring to the seventh as it is used in referring to the other six. Thus whatever we attribute to the first six days, 24-hours or millions of years, we must also attribute to the seventh day. And if each of the six days comprised millions of years, the Jewish people, who were told to rest on the seventh, should have rested for millions of years. Sorry, but we cannot accept this logic.
THE CREATIVE "DAYS" (SEASONS) GIVES US A PATTERN TO FOLLOW. WORK 6 DAYS AND TAKE THE 7TH OFF. GOD DID/IS RESTING FROM HIS CREATIVE WORKS AND WE NEED NOT MATCH HIM HOUR FOR HOUR (RIDICULOUS), BUT THE PRINCIPLE OF WORK THEN REST IS THE POINT AND PATTERN.
HE WORKED 6 CREATIVE PERIODS OF TIME, (SEASONS) THEN STOPPED. If we must understand the days of creation figuratively, what is wrong with figuratively understanding the days Jesus’ body was in the tomb—three solar days or millions of years? True, “day” is sometimes used symbolically in the scriptures, but not in relation to creation and the time Jesus’ body was in the tomb.
STRAWMAN TYPE ARGUMENT
Could the material from which the Earth and universe were made have existed billions of years? I understand verses one through five of the first chapter of Genesis as the first 24-hour day of creation. It was on this first day that God created the substance from which He formed the universe, created the light, and separated the light from darkness. “And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day” (v. 5). God took a chaotic mass of material He had spoken into existence and fashioned our immaculate universe! Oh, the power of our Creator!

It is claimed that the Hebrew “yom” may also be translated “era” or “epoch,” in addition to “day”? Some Hebrew scholars say yom may be thus translated. There are numerous complexities with this claim, however, when applied to the six days of creation. For if yom is translated “era” or “epoch” and applied to the six days of creation, sea creatures and the birds of the air lived to be millions of years old for they were created before land animals and man. Sea creatures and birds were created on the fifth day; land animals and man were created on the sixth day.

Geologists tell us the Earth is millions of years old and the universe is billions of years old. How do we refute their claim? [U]Perhaps the Earth does appear to be millions of years old, and perhaps the universe appears to be billions of years old. However, if God’s awesome power could create a man (Adam), as opposed to a child, and make him look biologically older than he actually is, could He not create a planet and universe and make both appear older than they actually are? If not, why not?
WHY WOULD GOD CREATE ANYTHING TO APPEAR OLD WHEN IT IS NOT. QUITE DECEPTIVE AND CONFUSING, TO SAY THE LEAST, AND GOD IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF CONFUSION! WHAT WOULD BE HIS PURPOSE TO GO AGAINST THE NATURE HE CREATED WHICH ALWAYS STARTS YOUNG THEN AGES IN TIME. In September, 2001, National Geographic said their evidence “yields an age for the universe of about 13 billion years.” “About” 13 billion years? They’re not sure! Could they be “about 13 billion years” off? This is the history of evolutionists—speculation, speculation, and more speculation. I suggest they permit God to help them. He says six days. Evolutionists say 13 billion years. I’ll take God’s testimony above the reckless and uncertain testimony of evolutionists and atheists. “Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array” (Genesis 2:1).Buff Scott Jr.

I could go on, but I think this presents my position sufficiently.

[acerrak]

Oh my. Looks Like Bro. Blume and I may have a differece of opinon here. Not saying I am correct in all my conclusion. A few points in this article (which is a good representaion of most young earths positions) that I will bring up a countering point. I am not going to counter this entire article point by point as it would be too lengthy.


I could go on, but I think this presents my position sufficiently.

Jesus spoke in parables which confused the crowd..-

[mfblume]

Oh my. Looks Like Bro. Blume and I may have a differece of opinon here. Not saying I am correct in all my conclusion. A few points in this article (which is a good representaion of most young earths positions) that I will bring up a countering point. I am not going to counter this entire article point by point as it would be too lengthy.


I could go on, but I think this presents my position sufficiently.

I commented that I believe the earth is billions of years old after my post with Buff Scott's quote, but that I mainly quoted this to show one man's view on the issue, and his words about actual days. I did not write that quote I made. I do not believe God made the earth 6000 years ago and it only appeared old when it was not.

I believe the days were 24 hour days since it says the EVENING AND MORNING. But I believe in the gap theory.

[Bowas]

Jesus spoke in parables which confused the crowd..-

Sorry. I wasn't trying to speak in a confusing manner.

[acerrak]

I commented that I believe the earth is billions of years old after my post with Buff Scott's quote, but that I mainly quoted this to show one man's view on the issue, and his words about actual days. I did not write that quote I made. I do not believe God made the earth 6000 years ago and it only appeared old when it was not.

I believe the days were 24 hour days since it says the EVENING AND MORNING. But I believe in the gap theory.

i still dont think the earth looks old. Im still trying to figure out how they get the millions of years when science states that humans were not around then.

no dating system is really correct, that has already been proven. and the earth enviroments is ever changing and in rapid pace.

The fact we can only trace History so far back then everything after that gets a blurr should be a eye opening in itself.

[Bowas]

I commented that I believe the earth is billions of years old after my post with Buff Scott's quote, but that I mainly quoted this to show one man's view on the issue, and his words about actual days. I did not write that quote I made. I do not believe God made the earth 6000 years ago and it only appeared old when it was not.

I believe the days were 24 hour days since it says the EVENING AND MORNING. But I believe in the gap theory.

Yes. I understand that. I understand you do not adhere to this article, you just presented it, although you do go with the 24 hour creative day to which, that is where I think you and I disagree. I hope I did not come off as challenging you.
I do not have all the answers and I still have some questions, but as far as "young earth" theory, no way. Not Biblical nor scientific, but it is dogma to be sure.
As far as the "evenings and the morning" portion, that to me is merely showing as one era was fading away, a new one was arriving. We still use similar words such as saying, "He is in his TWILIGHT years" and I am sure there are others. Another thing to consider is, it mentions an "evening and Morning" prior to the sun shining on the 4th day, to know whether it was evening (sun setting) or morning (sun rise)(as we most often use the phrase).
Once again, my responses was not directed at you, but rather to the content of this article.
I can go with a gap with the reason you have stated here and in times past. But I still believe the creative days were longer than 24 hours as I see no conclusive evidence from the Bible suggesting such. (this is all just my opinions)

[Bowas]

i still dont think the earth looks old. Im still trying to figure out how they get the millions of years when science states that humans were not around then.

no dating system is really correct, that has already been proven. and the earth enviroments is ever changing and in rapid pace.

The fact we can only trace History so far back then everything after that gets a blurr should be a eye opening in itself.

Seriously. You seem to be a very sincere person but you do not think the earth at least looks old? The science of errosion would give the appearance of an old earth. Even if the science is flawed, it would appear so. Straification is another appearance of old earth, if studied.
I, at one time fought for the young earth thought in that, it is what I was taught and I of course was taught by those I admired and respected as they were my teachers. Well, not all teachers are right on every subject.
I do have to say, you have an excellent attitude while we disagree, you have not been disagreeable.

[acerrak]

Seriously. You seem to be a very sincere person but you do not think the earth at least looks old? The science of errosion would give the appearance of an old earth. Even if the science is flawed, it would appear so. Straification is another appearance of old earth, if studied.
I, at one time fought for the young earth thought in that, it is what I was taught and I of course was taught by those I admired and respected as they were my teachers. Well, not all teachers are right on every subject.
I do have to say, you have an excellent attitude while we disagree, you have not been disagreeable.

i watch a tv show called the deadliest catch. crab fishermen up in the bearing sea.

Hurricans that past through there. in a matter of a few days will actually freeze the surface of the ocean. and the results are huge ice plates 100's of miles wide.

islands in the pacific disapear in the last 50 years.

places up north that use to be lush forrest are now a bog and swamp.

The earth changes daily. Some go unseen by the eye.

I use to belive like you do. My studies just have went the other way.

Well even though we can be disagreeable on it. I dont treat it as a salvation issue. Very well you could be right, and the same with me. Its a comprimise that we can discuss but something i wont debate over.

Now if you make pants on a woman turn into a sin.. yea im gonna debate you. but here I like to read others comments.

I just have chosen to go with a biblical date from the chronological age. To Me It fits more, and the way i see it.

I have a guy at work who doesnt believe dinasours exsisted even though there is bones. Am i gonna debate him over it..... nah

[james34]

is it wrong for a woman to shave their head?

[acerrak]

is it wrong for a woman to shave their head?

Jewish woman did it. and even some today still do it. very strict orthodoxy. They do it when they get married and wear a wig in its place.

But if a woman made a vow like Paul would it be?

Some were i believe when the Israelites captured other nations, they shaved there slave womens head as well.


But before we comment on shave. do you mean bald, or do you mean getting a hair cut?

Would it be wrong for a man to trim the edges of his beard?


i might add i really dont want to get off topic hear as well. so could you share with us your thoughts on creation as well?

[james34]

try taking the bible , and without any other book or article prove your doctrine.

I say 24 hrs. for 1 day and all in numerical order , no gap!

[acerrak]

try taking the bible , and without any other book or article prove your doctrine.

I say 24 hrs. for 1 day and all in numerical order , no gap!

you call it my doctrine. its always funny when people dont read the other post, They just post.

I know you dont care much for me, but if you read my post i agree with you..

6 days Good created the heavens and the earth and on the 7th he rested..

[james34]

i didnt mean your doctrine as in creation only, but as in any doctrine that you or any one might believe

[acerrak]

i didnt mean your doctrine as in creation only, but as in any doctrine that you or any one might believe

ah ok i took it directed at me. im sorry my apology.

[james34]

ah ok i took it directed at me. im sorry my apology.

oh no not a problem actually forgive me ,i could see where it looked that way.:o

[Bowas]

try taking the bible , and without any other book or article prove your doctrine.

I say 24 hrs. for 1 day and all in numerical order , no gap!

ah ok i took it directed at me. im sorry my apology.

Act 8:30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
Act 8:31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

Here we find an individual that had the Bible but even though he had it he still needed someone to further explain certain passages. Why? Not everything is at it may seem at first read, which is why we are commended to Study, to show ourselves approved...
Having said that, nothing in the creative "days demands them to be a 24 hour period of time solar day.
Day, can and does mean more than just a 24 hour solar day. See Gen 2:4 where it lumps ALL of the creative days/generations into the phrase, "...in THE Day..." (singular) Note: I will be unable to continue this after tomorrow for over a week (7 solar days to be exact in this case:)) as I will be on a cruise, but will check back.

[mfblume]

i still dont think the earth looks old. Im still trying to figure out how they get the millions of years when science states that humans were not around then.

Well, that is the whole gap theory basis. No humans, but millions of years for earth. Gap theory teaches that Genesis 1:2 onward occurred 6000 years ago, but Gen 1:1 is millions of years ago. Hence, a gap between the first two verses.

Check it out:

http://mikeblume.com/renovat1.htm
http://mikeblume.com/renovat2.htm
no dating system is really correct, that has already been proven. and the earth enviroments is ever changing and in rapid pace.

The fact we can only trace History so far back then everything after that gets a blurr should be a eye opening in itself.

This idea is not based upon science, but scripture.

[mfblume]

try taking the bible , and without any other book or article prove your doctrine.

I say 24 hrs. for 1 day and all in numerical order , no gap!

You are not aware of the gap theory,. It teaches a gap between the first two verses of Genesis, not between any of the 7 actual solar days.

[mfblume]

As far as the "evenings and the morning" portion, that to me is merely showing as one era was fading away, a new one was arriving. We still use similar words such as saying, "He is in his TWILIGHT years" and I am sure there are others. Another thing to consider is, it mentions an "evening and Morning" prior to the sun shining on the 4th day, to know whether it was evening (sun setting) or morning (sun rise)(as we most often use the phrase).

But that is pure assumption, and using metpahors from our culture and inserting them into Genesis which is a Hebrew book. I se no challenge in your words, bro., I just think it is a stretch and an attempt to align the bible with science to say the days were not days. The bible never said they were not anywhere. I am just very careful with how we interpret the bible. We have to have a basis for why we say they are not days, and I see no biblical basis but rather extrabiblical basis.


Once again, my responses was not directed at you, but rather to the content of this article.
I can go with a gap with the reason you have stated here and in times past. But I still believe the creative days were longer than 24 hours as I see no conclusive evidence from the Bible suggesting such. (this is all just my opinions)

The conclusive evidence is like the author of the article I quoted said. BECAUSE of Genesis we have six days of work and then a rest. And as he asked, why that correlation to days if it was originally millions of years? Thanks for your thoughts!

[acerrak]

You are not aware of the gap theory,. It teaches a gap between the first two verses of Genesis, not between any of the 7 actual solar days.

im aware that upon this recent information that futurist are correct in there gap theory assertion of the 69th week in daniel based on the gap theory of like figure in genesis

:muwahaha

[Bowas]

But that is pure assumption, and using metpahors from our culture and inserting them into Genesis which is a Hebrew book. I se no challenge in your words, bro., I just think it is a stretch and an attempt to align the bible with science to say the days were not days. The bible never said they were not anywhere. I am just very careful with how we interpret the bible. We have to have a basis for why we say they are not days, and I see no biblical basis but rather extrabiblical basis.



The conclusive evidence is like the author of the article I quoted said. BECAUSE of Genesis we have six days of work and then a rest. And as he asked, why that correlation to days if it was originally millions of years? Thanks for your thoughts!

Gen 2:4 These are "the generations" of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in "the day" (yom)that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

(Ignore the caps as I typed this in another post and
capped" it to separate it from what I was countering.)


Gen 2:4 These are the generations*1 of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day*2 that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

*1 The word "generations" is used in this verse where the word "day" was used in chapter 1, so I cannot see where we can can insist on the narrower definition of the word "day" when the Bible itself does not limit itself, but in fact broadens its definition by using "generations to refer back to the exact same periods of time referred to as "day"
*2 All the creative days (7 of them) are encompassed into the phrase "THE DAY". which is singular, indicating it is referring to the entire creative era.

"YOM" DAY IS NOT ALWAYS REFERRING TO A SINGLE 24 HOUR SOLAR DAY. YES, MOST OFTEN IT IS, BECAUSE IT HAPPENS MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE LONGER YOM/DAYS. SOME SAY WE ARE IN "MAN'S DAY" NOW AND IT IS LONGER THAN 24 HOURS. DAY HAS A BROADER MEANING THAN LIMITING IT TO A SINGLE 24 HOUR PERIOD OF TIME. PLEASE NOTICE IN THIS VERSE THE WORD "GENERATIONS" HAS BEEN USED INSTEAD OF THE WORD "DAYS" AS WAS USED IN CHAPTER 1 IN REFERRING TO THE CREATIVE PERIODS OF TIME, SO THE INSISTANCE OF A CREATIVE PERIOD MUST BE A 24 HOUR SOLAR DAY IS QUESTIONABLE. NOTICE TOO, THE COMPLETE CREATIVE PROCESS OF 7 DAYS IS NOW CONDENSED INTO A SINGLE UNIT CALLED "THE DAY". ALL 7 "DAYS" ARE NOW NOT ONLY CALLED "GENERATIONS" BUT THEY ARE TOTALLY JUST CALLED "THE DAY".

Questions:
1.) What are "generations" as used in this verse?
2.) What is "THE day" used in this verse?

As mentioned last night in my post, I will be gone for a week (not a prophetic week of 7 years) but a I will be gone in the narrower and most common definition of the word week and be gone 7 solar days, not a creative day, otherwise it could be a real long time before I return. ;)

[mfblume]

im aware that upon this recent information that futurist are correct in there gap theory assertion of the 69th week in daniel based on the gap theory of like figure in genesis

:muwahaha

Oh ya??!! :lol

No way dude. lol

Anyway, the gap theory in Genesis has no bearing on any doctrine whatsoever, so is take-it-or-leave-it. But the gap in the 70 weeks is absolutely a must for Dispensationalism.

nyah nyah

[mfblume]

Gen 2:4 These are "the generations" of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in "the day" (yom)that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

(Ignore the caps as I typed this in another post and
capped" it to separate it from what I was countering.)


Gen 2:4 These are the generations*1 of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day*2 that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

*1 The word "generations" is used in this verse where the word "day" was used in chapter 1, so I cannot see where we can can insist on the narrower definition of the word "day" when the Bible itself does not limit itself, but in fact broadens its definition by using "generations to refer back to the exact same periods of time referred to as "day"
*2 All the creative days (7 of them) are encompassed into the phrase "THE DAY". which is singular, indicating it is referring to the entire creative era.

"YOM" DAY IS NOT ALWAYS REFERRING TO A SINGLE 24 HOUR SOLAR DAY. YES, MOST OFTEN IT IS, BECAUSE IT HAPPENS MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THE LONGER YOM/DAYS. SOME SAY WE ARE IN "MAN'S DAY" NOW AND IT IS LONGER THAN 24 HOURS. DAY HAS A BROADER MEANING THAN LIMITING IT TO A SINGLE 24 HOUR PERIOD OF TIME. PLEASE NOTICE IN THIS VERSE THE WORD "GENERATIONS" HAS BEEN USED INSTEAD OF THE WORD "DAYS" AS WAS USED IN CHAPTER 1 IN REFERRING TO THE CREATIVE PERIODS OF TIME, SO THE INSISTANCE OF A CREATIVE PERIOD MUST BE A 24 HOUR SOLAR DAY IS QUESTIONABLE. NOTICE TOO, THE COMPLETE CREATIVE PROCESS OF 7 DAYS IS NOW CONDENSED INTO A SINGLE UNIT CALLED "THE DAY". ALL 7 "DAYS" ARE NOW NOT ONLY CALLED "GENERATIONS" BUT THEY ARE TOTALLY JUST CALLED "THE DAY".

Questions:
1.) What are "generations" as used in this verse?
2.) What is "THE day" used in this verse?

As mentioned last night in my post, I will be gone for a week (not a prophetic week of 7 years) but a I will be gone in the narrower and most common definition of the word week and be gone 7 solar days, not a creative day, otherwise it could be a real long time before I return. ;)

GENERATION in the bible is a broad term used much in poetic manner in the Old Testament. It's like "SON OF...". Noah was a SON OF 500 years in the Hebrew. I see this in SONS OF GOD in Gen 6, where they are godly people. Same with generation. THE DAY God made the heaven and earth was in Gen 1:1, not the following days of the week.

But evening and morning are a different animal altogether anyway. The only reason one would speak of non-actual solar days is to appease science. Use of morning and evening nail it down for clarification and surety of solar days, in my mind.

[acerrak]

Oh ya??!! :lol

No way dude. lol

Anyway, the gap theory in Genesis has no bearing on any doctrine whatsoever, so is take-it-or-leave-it. But the gap in the 70 weeks is absolutely a must for Dispensationalism.

nyah nyah

:muwahaha <-just because i like the icon

[mfblume]

:muwahaha <-just because i like the icon

Lol

[RandyWayne]

try taking the bible , and without any other book or article prove your doctrine.

I say 24 hrs. for 1 day and all in numerical order , no gap!

So when did these massive meteoric impacts take place? Any one of them would have eliminated most life from the planet.

[kclee4jc]

I think it's a good possibility.

[seekerman]

Could it be the 1st, 2nd and 3rd days are non-solar days?

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

No solar activity in Gen 1:5....that didn't occur until below....

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

The solar activity is created in Gen 1:14-19?

[mfblume]

There is a great difference in the Hebrew words for MADE and CREATED. To CREATE means to make something from nothing. TO MAKE means to make something from something already in existence. Look and see what things God CREATED or MADE, and I think it gives a clue to Genesis 1.

The sun, moon and stars were MADE, not CREATED in day four. I think they were created in Gen 1:1, and it was messed up with the fall of satan before verse 2, and the earth BECAME void and without form. God had to MAKE or RENOVATE things all over again, and only CREATE LIFE.

[seekerman]

There is a great difference in the Hebrew words for MADE and CREATED. To CREATE means to make something from nothing. TO MAKE means to make something from something already in existence. Look and see what things God CREATED or MADE, and I think it gives a clue to Genesis 1.

The sun, moon and stars were MADE, not CREATED in day four. I think they were created in Gen 1:1, and it was messed up with the fall of satan before verse 2, and the earth BECAME void and without form. God had to MAKE or RENOVATE things all over again, and only CREATE LIFE.

So, you're saying that the fourth day of Genesis is a restoration of heavenly bodies already in existence, but damaged?

[mfblume]

So, you're saying that the fourth day of Genesis is a restoration of heavenly bodies already in existence, but damaged?

Exactly.

Notice that Psalm 104 lists every event of the six days of Genesis in trhe same sequence and order. And when verse 30 arrives, we read this:

Psa 104:30 KJV Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.


LIFE was created but the earth and the rest were RENEWED.

[seekerman]

Exactly.

Notice that Psalm 104 lists every event of the six days of Genesis in trhe same sequence and order. And when verse 30 arrives, we read this:

Psa 104:30 KJV Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.


LIFE was created but the earth and the rest were RENEWED.

I may agree with you. :)

[acerrak]

Exactly.

Notice that Psalm 104 lists every event of the six days of Genesis in trhe same sequence and order. And when verse 30 arrives, we read this:

Psa 104:30 KJV Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.


LIFE was created but the earth and the rest were RENEWED.

i think that is really stretching that verse to say that.

i like what barnes says on the matter

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
"Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created - That is, New races are created in their place, or start up as if they were created directly by God. They derive their being from him as really as those did which were first formed by his hand, and the work of creation is constantly going on.

And thou renewest the face of the earth - The earth is not suffered to become desolate. Though one generation passes off, yet a new one is made in its place, and the face of the earth constantly puts on the aspect of freshness and newness. "

life is booming

[mfblume]

i think that is really stretching that verse to say that.

i like what barnes says on the matter

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
"Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created - That is, New races are created in their place, or start up as if they were created directly by God. They derive their being from him as really as those did which were first formed by his hand, and the work of creation is constantly going on.

And thou renewest the face of the earth - The earth is not suffered to become desolate. Though one generation passes off, yet a new one is made in its place, and the face of the earth constantly puts on the aspect of freshness and newness. "

life is booming

I think we can get what Barnes said about it, too. But if you correlate the sequence of events listed in Psalm 104, they are the days of the week in Genesis 1... right down to light being mentioned first, waters second all the way down to creatures of the sixth day. It is Genesis 1 all over again.

[acerrak]

I think we can get what Barnes said about it, too. But if you correlate the sequence of events listed in Psalm 104, they are the days of the week in Genesis 1... right down to light being mentioned first, waters second all the way down to creatures of the sixth day. It is Genesis 1 all over again.

yes but the renewal part is the creatures and the humans, as he talks of a replenishing

genrations after generations.

[acerrak]

yes but the renewal part is the creatures and the humans, as he talks of a replenishing

genrations after generations.

27 All creatures look to you
to give them their food at the proper time.
28 When you give it to them,
they gather it up;
when you open your hand,
they are satisfied with good things.
29 When you hide your face,
they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
they die and return to the dust.
30 When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the ground

these verses have todo with God's creatures, the beast of the field and air etc.
I put humans as well since we are creatures of his Creation. However these verses from pslams 104 are talking about the animals and fowls of the land, Not recontructive surgery of the earth, But blessing what he has made and to multiply On it


31 May the glory of the LORD endure forever;
may the LORD rejoice in his works—
32 he who looks at the earth, and it trembles,
who touches the mountains, and they smoke

[stony ground]

I don't want to stop the discussion, I just wanted to thank everyonefor their input. Lots of valuable info & interesting viewpoints here.

[mfblume]

yes but the renewal part is the creatures and the humans, as he talks of a replenishing

genrations after generations.

That is not the contextual flow of Psalm 104 though. It reads like Genesis 1 and describes all that account as renewal of the earth. I think not that it is something to be dogmatic over, but it seems to relate this idea.

[acerrak]

That is not the contextual flow of Psalm 104 though. It reads like Genesis 1 and describes all that account as renewal of the earth. I think not that it is something to be dogmatic over, but it seems to relate this idea.

look at the verses i shown you he specifically dealing the creatures.


All creatures look to you
to give them their food at the proper time.
28 When you give it to them,
they gather it up;
when you open your hand,
they are satisfied with good things.
29 When you hide your face,
they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
they die and return to the dust.
30 When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the ground

I cant just depend on some idea of some sorta of possible contextual flow i have to look at what the scriptures state and mean.
Its not a renewal of the earth itself stating he reworked it. He talks about the creatures in it reproducing, and i would even say producing crops each year is a renewal of the ground. But no its not a recreation of the earth to make a old earth look young.

so We have a man giving thanks to the creator for making the earth and how things on the earth are blessed, fed, die, and multiply... Its the normal cycle of LIFE