My husband has a scientific bent, he has an MS in electrical engineering along with a PhD in International business. This morning he was explaining to me how the universe is 13+ billions of years old.
As a previous dispensationalist, our occasional debates over scientific theory and the bible would sometimes be, well a bit stressful.
Since I have begun to explore new POVs on eschatology, I am just in the learning stage, I have seen preterists state that 1000 years is a figure of speech and not literal.
Is it possible that the 7 days of creation don't equate to a literal 1000 years per day and I can stop debating with my husband and agree that the earth and universe could be as old the scientist seem to believe it is?
My husband has a scientific bent, he has an MS in electrical engineering along with a PhD in International business. This morning he was explaining to me how the universe is 13+ billions of years old.
As a previous dispensationalist, our occasional debates over scientific theory and the bible would sometimes be, well a bit stressful.
Since I have begun to explore new POVs on eschatology, I am just in the learning stage, I have seen preterists state that 1000 years is a figure of speech and not literal.
Is it possible that the 7 days of creation don't equate to a literal 1000 years per day and I can stop debating with my husband and agree that the earth and universe could be as old the scientist seem to believe it is?
It's possible. Here's an excellent book on Creation that offers some insight on that interpretation. You might enjoy reading it. (Or you might want to at least check out the Summary link in Chapter 6, found in the Table of Contents.)
But as for me, I don't know all the answers. I do keep coming back to literal Creationism. But I'm open to scientific insights that might not fit the young earth model.
It's possible. Here's an excellent book on Creation that offers some insight on that interpretation. You might enjoy reading it. (Or you might want to at least check out the Summary link in Chapter 6, found in the Table of Contents.)
But as for me, I don't know all the answers. I do keep coming back to literal Creationism. But I'm open to scientific insights that might not fit the young earth model.
this looks interesting, particularly the section on relativity.
I have this weird thought that enters my mind when I think about Creation, the universe, and time... here's a text...
Genesis 1:1-2 King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
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.
When I read the text I see something in my mind that I've never heard anyone really elaborate on. I'll put parenthesis in the text to share the thoughts I have as I read it. Let me know if any of you have read it this way....
"In the beginning (dateless past) God created the heaven and the earth (the entire Universe including planet Earth) .
And the earth (planet Earth) was without form, and void (an empty, uninhabited world) ; and darkness was upon the face of the deep (the darkness of the atmosphere concealed a primordial ocean) . And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters (God's Spirit moved over this primordial ocean) .
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light (God spoke and rays of light penetrated the thick clouds of this darkened atmosphere to reveal what He was about to do on the surface of this empty water covered planet) .
The Universe is not described with any benchmark to determine age. The planet that would be transformed into what we know as Earth is also not given a benchmark to determine its age. But God is taking six days to transform this ancient and lifeless, water covered, world into a world suitable for man.
this looks interesting, particularly the section on relativity.
I think you'll enjoy the book. When it comes to the Old Earth Creation model, this book is one of the best that I've read. Some other decent Old Earth Creation books and theories are:
- Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy, by Hugh Ross (Day Age Theory)
- Creation and Evolution: Rethinking the Evidence from Science and the Bible, by Alan Hayward (Divine Fiat Theory)
- Genesis Unbound: A Provocative New Look at the Creation Account, by John Sailhamer (EdenicTheory)
You might want to check them out if you ever have the chance.
Since the sun and the moon were not creates until day 4, our understanding of what a "day" meant must reflect that fact.
When I taught Genesis to kids, we focused on sequence of events. The first thing God created was this. The second thing God created was....etc.
Genesis is not a book about planetary geology. In creation, we learn that God created the world, not a group of Egyptian gods.
I do not mix geology and theology.
When God created Adam, he did not create a baby. He created a mature specimen of his species. The same is true of the planet. He created a mature planet capable of supporting human and plant life.
If a biologist examined Adam, he would have seen 32 teeth. Adam could walk. He was for all purposes, much younger than he appeared. It is the same with geologists who examine the fossil or rock record. It appears to be much older than it actually is.
I have no idea how old the earth is. I candidly dismiss the simplistic interpretations of some who blame every geological feature on the flood of Noah.
Since the sun and the moon were not creates until day 4, our understanding of what a "day" meant must reflect that fact.
Day 4 is interesting. I was always taught that God created the sun, moon, and stars on day 4, but the text might actually not support that. I'll share what I found in my studies...
Genesis 1:14-19
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.
In verse 16, the word "made" is translated from the Hebrew "asah". "Asah," the Hebrew for "made," is a different word than the one used back in the first verse where God "created" the heaven and the earth. There the word was "bara" which means "to carve out." The meaning of "Asah" is more general. It can mean "to labor," "to work about (or upon) anything," "to make," or "to produce by labor." The word is translated many different ways.
So, in Genesis 14-19, we're not seeing a creative act like we see referenced in Genesis 1:1. We're seeing God essentially, making the sun, moon, and stars (which were created "In the beginning") visible from the surface of the planet. Imagine standing on a darkened and watery world and watching God speak and suddenly rays of light penetrate the clouds, but the sun, moon, and stars are still not yet visible. It's overcast. But on the fourth day, God clears away the clouds and makes the sun, moon, and stars visible to you. By clearing away the think cloud cover (mentioned in verse 2), He has now essentially set the sun, moon, and stars as objects to be seen in the sky above your head.
Aquila, thanks for quoting Gen 1 concerning day 4.
in my humble opinion, God created Time on day 4. period. any attempt to identify how old something is....that preexisted the beginning of time, is an exercise in futility.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Linear Mode
