[_ Old Earth _] Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

[love2live]

Of course they can, as along as by strict, you do not mean to the year. The possible room for interpretation is small. I don't see how that would help anyone with old ages in their bonnet at all.

Precise enough to narrow down the time since Adam pretty close. Whether one choses to think Terah lived somewhere a bit longer, or etc or not!

No, the age of the earth is to be believed or not, it is not in question. The margin of time one could interpret is all young earth. No way round it.

Of course it does. Adam lived so many years ago, and we know when it was, within a small margin of error.

2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

So how long did Jesus die, or Jonah stay in the belly of a fish??? Thousands of years??? Context is important. A day is still a day, no matter if it can be used figuratively to show God is forever.

Nobody is talking about the length of somebody's life when we're talking about a time-line, what Free and I are saying is that some of the events mentioned are not related to each other in a strict chronological order. There are gaps in the chronological order and these gaps amount to way more than 6000 years... if it's 6400 or 6000, that's still 400 years to show that even with the narrowest view at the Bible there is still a 400 year difference. We know that it is way more than 6000 years, and Free has showed you plenty of evidence which supports that idea. As I said, if you want to argue about the time-line talk to Free.

That is my point, some things in the Bible are figuratively speaking. What you are doing is trying to take some things which are figuratively describing the New Heavens and you are trying to say that the entire Earth and Universe would have to change in order for the New Heavens to arrive. Not true. The Earth will stay the same, the spirit of God is always welcome here, and it always has been. There is no need for the Earth/Universe to change, nor has there ever been such a need- it's SIMPLE!

 

[dad]

Nobody is talking about the length of somebody's life when we're talking about a time-line, what Free and I are saying is that some of the events mentioned are not related to each other in a strict chronological order.

You inability to understand other parts of the bible is not the issue here. The issue is that the years from Adam are laid out to within a small range of time.

There are gaps in the chronological order and these gaps amount to way more than 6000 years...

False, that is why you can't prove your claim.

if it's 6400 or 6000, that's still 400 years to show that even with the narrowest view at the Bible there is still a 400 year difference.

A few century range of time is nothing. It rules out old ages any way you look at it.

We know that it is way more than 6000 years, and Free has showed you plenty of evidence which supports that idea.

No, none. Casting aspersions and doubt on the bible in general, does nothing to change the time listed since Adam.

As I said, if you want to argue about the time-line talk to Free.

She has nothing to say about it. The times till Adam are clear enough.

That is my point, some things in the Bible are figuratively speaking. What you are doing is trying to take some things which are figuratively describing the New Heavens and you are trying to say that the entire Earth and Universe would have to change in order for the New Heavens to arrive.

They do. This sun is not forever, or stars, or moon, or earth, or people, or anything. The laws of this state do not jive with the differences we see in the past and future.

Not true. The Earth will stay the same,

That is false, Jesus said it will pass away. You are overruled.

the spirit of God is always welcome here, and it always has been. There is no need for the Earth/Universe to change, nor has there ever been such a need- it's SIMPLE!

There is a need if it is to last forever. There is a need if light is to be not the light of the sun. There is a need if New Jerusalem is to land on earth without killing all life. There is a need if trees are to grow fruit monthly, and lions are to change into grass eaters. Get serious.

 

[Dunzo]

Look dad, if your hypothesis is so ground-breakingly awesome, why don't you take it to the scientific community? If it has any merit they'd surely take it into account.

Also, I'm confused, have you presented evidence for your case yet or not?

 

[dad]

Look dad, if your hypothesis is so ground-breakingly awesome, why don't you take it to the scientific community? If it has any merit they'd surely take it into account.

Also, I'm confused, have you presented evidence for your case yet or not?

Evidence that lions will eat straw is the bible. The new universe state coming, is bible. Science has no evidence of a same state future or past. What more could we ask for??

 

[love2live]

False, that is why you can't prove your claim.

It takes biblical and scientific knowledge in order to understand the Universe, you lack the latter or you just refuse to accept it because you lack some knowledge in the first one. In regards to your claim of a different Universe and the split, here is an explanation based on the Gap Theory:

Ask yourself this question: When Noah's flood happened did it change anything in the upper heavens? Would a flood on the Earth have any effect on the sun, moon, or stars? The obvious answer is NO. The heavens of Noah's days were the same heavens as in Adam's day; same sun, same moon, same stars. FACT: Noah's flood had no effect on the upper heavens. All of Noah's flood's effects were confined to the Earth's surface and atmosphere. And although the Bible speaks about the "windows of heaven" being opened and water coming down (Genesis 7:11), the context of that reference is the "first" heaven of the Earth's atmosphere. That is where rain comes from. (Keep in mind: The Bible says there are three (3) heavens. See 2 Corinthians 12:2). This explained in great detail later.

Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7). If Noah's flood did not alter the upper heavens, then this verse must be speaking about an event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical candidate.

"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)

Since the flood of Noah's time was a judgment upon the world of that time, then a flood before Adam's creation would imply a previous judgment upon an old world order before the seven days of the creation narrative.

To insist that the word "fill" is the best rendering implies that the King James Bible translators did not understand the true meaning of the Hebrew word and "mistranslated" male in both those verses. But did they really? Just five verses before rendering male as "replenish" in Genesis 1:28, the same translators rendered male as "fill" in Genesis 1:22:

"And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
(Genesis 1:22 KJV)

This fact shows that those translators most certainly knew the subtle differences in meanings of the Hebrew word male and were well aware of the interpretive implications of using the English word "replenish" in Genesis 1:28 and 9:1 in the King James translation.

Now, if these were the only places in the Scriptures that gave support to the "Gap Theory" interpretation, that would be very skimpy evidence indeed upon which to base sound doctrine. But, as we have already pointed out, there are other literal wording considerations within the Holy Bible that raise valid interpretative issues. For example, there is the issue of the Biblical word "Generations":

Like mankind, the Bible says that the Earth and the heavens also have "generations" in their histories:

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

"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;"
(Genesis 5:1 KJV)

"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9 KJV)

In all three of the verses above the word "generations" [] is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.

The Holy Scriptures are clearly saying that the seven days work was a new generation of the heavens and the Earth when God made the world of Man following the desolation found at the time of Genesis 1:2. Something similar will be done in the future. The Bible says there will be yet another generation of the heavens and Earth at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
(Matthew 19:28 KJV)

"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness."
(2 Peter 3:13 KJV)

"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."
(Isaiah 65:17 KJV)

The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence that God preserved for us to testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was inhabited for a long period before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. Those records, written in stone, also provide evidence of a long reign of Death upon the old Earth and the sudden end of the old world order by a universal destructive event.

One of the greatest remaining mysteries of modern geology is an episode of mass destruction and extinction which occurred in the recent geological age called the Pleistocene, the age just before the Holocene, which is called the age of Man. This extinction event appears to be closely linked with the Ice Age. Evidence of this global catastrophe consists, in part, of vast "animal cemeteries," found many places around the world, which seem to show a catastrophic and sudden destruction of life all across the planet only a few thousand years ago. This little-known evidence was documented by many back in the 19th century, but this evidence is mostly ignored by the leading scientists of our day because it does not fit into the prevailing Evolutionary paradigm. The Young Earth Creationists, however, have seized upon these reports as their proof of Noah's flood. We will show that this evidence, in actuality, is the proof of a global extinction event and flood which happened before Noah's flood; indeed before the time of Genesis 1:2, and was only a component of a universal catastrophic event which saw the end of all life on the surface of the Earth before the sevens days of Genesis. At various places throughout this website we will present this evidence and discuss it's relevance within the context of the Biblical time line. That time line is discussed in detail on the page which follows this one.

Clearly, if we believe the literal wording of the Bible, there was indeed a universal creative event during the seven days of Genesis, about 6,000 literal years ago. But the literal wording of the Bible and the Earth's geology reveals that there is more to the story - it was not the original creation of all things. Understanding the time gap in Genesis opens a knowledge gap. You just can't rely on your own understanding or the traditions of man to obtain this knowledge. You have to TRUST THE BOOK.

"For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV)

Previously on this page we stressed that in order to understand what the literal Biblical text is actually saying, it must be interpreted by it's own Scripturally-defined terms. On the page that immediately follows we will discuss two very important Scripturally-defined terms, and the differences in conceptual meanings they convey. It is essential that students of God's Word comprehend these terms and differences in order to discern truth from traditional assumptions. These words are "Earth" and "World" and they are not same.

 

[dad]

It takes biblical and scientific knowledge in order to understand the Universe,

No, not the universe of the future or past, if it was different! Today's knowledge is limited to todays universe. Therefore it is in trying to apply it, that gives a lack of understanding. As far as understanding todays universe for today, that is real science, and not related to the age of the earth, or creation.

In regards to your claim of a different Universe and the split, here is an explanation based on the Gap Theory:[/b]
Ask yourself this question: When Noah's flood happened did it change anything in the upper heavens?

I would say the split did, about a century after the flood.

Would a flood on the Earth have any effect on the sun, moon, or stars?

Yes, the universe is different.

The obvious answer is NO.

Wrong, it can only be yes.

The heavens of Noah's days were the same heavens as in Adam's day; same sun, same moon, same stars.

No, I say they were not. prove it. Todays sun is in a process that means it is not forever if it always were the same. Etc. The decay state of the atomic level likely was not the same, and even gravity and light as we know them, etc etc.

...The Bible says there are three (3) heavens. See 2 Corinthians 12:2). This explained in great detail later.

What about the seventh heaven? What about where God was before this universe existed? Etc? Don't think you have a handle on eternity.

Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7). If Noah's flood did not alter the upper heavens, then this verse must be speaking about an event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical candidate.

Hey, good one!!!! Excellent, I gotta use that. Here again a clear difference in the heavens of old!!!!! Thanks for that. The evidence mounts.

Since the flood of Noah's time was a judgment upon the world of that time, then a flood before Adam's creation would imply a previous judgment upon an old world order before the seven days of the creation narrative.

Nonsense.

"And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
(Genesis 1:22 KJV)

Is there some reason that you think there were no seas?

Now, if these were the only places in the Scriptures that gave support to the "Gap Theory" interpretation, that would be very skimpy evidence indeed upon which to base sound doctrine. But, as we have already pointed out, there are other literal wording considerations within the Holy Bible that raise valid interpretative issues. For example, there is the issue of the Biblical word "Generations":

Gap theory alright. Why focus on what we don't know, rather than what we do?

Like mankind, the Bible says that the Earth and the heavens also have "generations" in their histories:

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

So? They obviously started at creation.

"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9 KJV)

generations do not imply a separate creation.

In all three of the verses above the word "generations" [] is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.

No. There were plenty of lines of decent.

The Holy Scriptures are clearly saying that the seven days work was a new generation of the heavens and the Earth when God made the world of Man following the desolation found at the time of Genesis 1:2. Something similar will be done in the future. The Bible says there will be yet another generation of the heavens and Earth at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

No. He simply gives the line of man, and order of creation.

The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence that God preserved for us to testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was inhabited for a long period before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. Those records, written in stone, also provide evidence of a long reign of Death upon the old Earth and the sudden end of the old world order by a universal destructive event.

False, it is merely a migration record from Eden area, in the different conditions of the past universe state.

One of the greatest remaining mysteries of modern geology is an episode of mass destruction and extinction which occurred in the recent geological age called the Pleistocene, the age just before the Holocene, which is called the age of Man. This extinction event appears to be closely linked with the Ice Age.

I don't consider it a mystery. I can see how limited scope geologists might.

Evidence of this global catastrophe consists, in part, of vast "animal cemeteries," found many places around the world, which seem to show a catastrophic and sudden destruction of life all across the planet only a few thousand years ago. This little-known evidence was documented by many back in the 19th century, but this evidence is mostly ignored by the leading scientists of our day because it does not fit into the prevailing Evolutionary paradigm. The Young Earth Creationists, however, have seized upon these reports as their proof of Noah's flood. We will show that this evidence, in actuality, is the proof of a global extinction event and flood which happened before Noah's flood;

So what? I am not into flood geology.

Clearly, if we believe the literal wording of the Bible, there was indeed a universal creative event during the seven days of Genesis, about 6,000 literal years ago. But the literal wording of the Bible and the Earth's geology reveals that there is more to the story - it was not the original creation of all things. Understanding the time gap in Genesis opens a knowledge gap. You just can't rely on your own understanding or the traditions of man to obtain this knowledge. You have to TRUST THE BOOK.

That is something you read into it. There is no reason to go beyond creation week.

It is essential that students of God's Word comprehend these terms and differences in order to discern truth from traditional assumptions. These words are "Earth" and "World" and they are not same.

So?

 

[love2live]

...The Bible says there are three (3) heavens. See 2 Corinthians 12:2). This explained in great detail later.

What about the seventh heaven? What about where God was before this universe existed? Etc? Don't think you have a handle on eternity.

Seventh heaven? Not in the Bible! LOL...

Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7). If Noah's flood did not alter the upper heavens, then this verse must be speaking about an event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical candidate.

Hey, good one!!!! Excellent, I gotta use that. Here again a clear difference in the heavesn of old!!!!! Thanks for that. The evidence mounts.

Read before you talk, there is a reason why "heavens and earth which are now" is not exactly speaking of another Universe.

Now, if these were the only places in the Scriptures that gave support to the "Gap Theory" interpretation, that would be very skimpy evidence indeed upon which to base sound doctrine. But, as we have already pointed out, there are other literal wording considerations within the Holy Bible that raise valid interpretative issues. For example, there is the issue of the Biblical word "Generations":

Gap theory alright. Why focus on what we don't know, rather than what we do?

Because there is a GAP in what we "know"...

[quote:efc20]In all three of the verses above the word "generations" [] is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.

No. There were plenty of lines of decent.[/quote:efc20]
Not talking about generations of people, talking about the generations of Earth.

[quote:efc20]The Holy Scriptures are clearly saying that the seven days work was a new generation of the heavens and the Earth when God made the world of Man following the desolation found at the time of Genesis 1:2. Something similar will be done in the future. The Bible says there will be yet another generation of the heavens and Earth at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

No. He simply gives the line of man, and order of creation.[/quote:efc20]
O.K. I see you have your logic somewhere far away from your head, placed in a good hiding spot so even you can't find it...

The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence that God preserved for us to testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was inhabited for a long period before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. Those records, written in stone, also provide evidence of a long reign of Death upon the old Earth and the sudden end of the old world order by a universal destructive event.

False, it is merely a migration record from Eden area, in the different conditions of the past universe state.

Things exist for a reason: records of our world which go beyond the Bible... these are things that people at the time could NOT comprehend, and it seems that even now some people still don't get it.

Clearly, if we believe the literal wording of the Bible, there was indeed a universal creative event during the seven days of Genesis, about 6,000 literal years ago. But the literal wording of the Bible and the Earth's geology reveals that there is more to the story - it was not the original creation of all things. Understanding the time gap in Genesis opens a knowledge gap. You just can't rely on your own understanding or the traditions of man to obtain this knowledge. You have to TRUST THE BOOK.

That is something you read into it. There is no reason to go beyond creation week.

We go beyond creation week because there is a GAP in the YEC story... a gap which proves that the Earth is OLD!

 

[dad]

What about the seventh heaven? What about where God was before this universe existed? Etc? Don't think you have a handle on eternity.

Seventh heaven? Not in the Bible! LOL... [/quote]
Well, there are old Israeli accounts about that.

"The Seven Heavens
Some of the Rabbis of the Talmud had very precise ideas about the structure of the upper regions. They were presumably influenced by the fact that the Hebrew word for "heavens" or "sky" appears only in a plural form: shamayim, implying a multiplicity of heavens. Given the special role of the number seven in the Bible, it was natural that this number should also determine the arrangement of the heavens.

The Jewish sages had no trouble finding distinct functions for each of the seven levels. The heavens, mysterious as they are, affect us in many aspects of our daily life, as well as having important religious associations.

Thus, according to one quaint itemization, one heaven is required simply to screen off the light at night-time, another to store the rain and snow, and still another to house the planets. Others have more religious uses, accommodating the souls of the righteous and the unborn, as well as various levels of angels, the Heavenly Jerusalem, and the throne of God.

According to one legend, the Israelites who assembled at Mount Sinai to receive the Torah were treated to a glimpse of all seven heavens opened up above them.

The Jewish mystical tradition, as it is revealed to us in texts dating from just after the Talmudic period, turned the concept of seven heavenly levels into a key focus of its speculations. According to their imagery these heavens are actually palaces--"heikhalot"--and the task of the mystic is to ascend as high as he can until he reaches the highest level, where he will be vouchsafed a peek at the throne of God.

In this conception of multi-layered palaces the Jewish mystics were influenced by the verse in the Song of Songs (1:4); "The King [i.e. God] has brought me into his chambers," a verse which had already been interpreted allegorically by Rabbi Akiva, the most renowned Talmudic mystic."

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/ ... eaven.html

Read before you talk, there is a reason why "heavens and earth which are now" is not exactly speaking of another Universe.

Of course, the now heavens are those here now. The former ones of old were just that. It's in the bag.

Because there is a GAP in what we "know"...

Not really, only in what you think you know.

Not talking about generations of people, talking about the generations of Earth.

Well that seems to be straining at a nat.

Things exist for a reason: records of our world which go beyond the Bible... these are things that people at the time could NOT comprehend, and it seems that even now some people still don't get it.

Fossils are from creatures. There is a certain sequence of them, in different formations. It represents what I said, you are talking in circles vaguely about what you know not of.

We go beyond creation week because there is a GAP in the YEC story... a gap which proves that the Earth is OLD!

The gap is in your head.

 

[love2live]

Seventh heaven? Not in the Bible! LOL...

Well, there are old Israeli accounts about that.

"The Seven Heavens
Some of the Rabbis of the Talmud had very precise ideas about the structure of the upper regions. They were presumably influenced by the fact that the Hebrew word for "heavens" or "sky" appears only in a plural form: shamayim, implying a multiplicity of heavens. Given the special role of the number seven in the Bible, it was natural that this number should also determine the arrangement of the heavens.

But it's not in the Bible, it's in the Talmud which is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs, and history. All your theories are based on your imagination of what is in the Bible, and Seventh Heaven, for example, is NOT in the Bible.

Read before you talk, there is a reason why "heavens and earth which are now" is not exactly speaking of another Universe.

Of course, the now heavens are those here now. The former ones of old were just that. It's in the bag.

Obviously you forgot to read the entire post... you should also look at the reference and see what it says too.

[quote:a1603]Because there is a GAP in what we "know"...

Not really, only in what you think you know.[/quote:a1603]
Of course ... you said it yourself "Why focus on what we don't know, rather than what we do?"
LOL, obviously if you don't know something there is a GAP in your theory LOL.

[quote:a1603]Not talking about generations of people, talking about the generations of Earth.

Well that seems to be straining at a nat.[/quote:a1603]
Seems like there is a gap in your theory.

[quote:a1603]Things exist for a reason: records of our world which go beyond the Bible... these are things that people at the time could NOT comprehend, and it seems that even now some people still don't get it.

Fossils are from creatures. There is a certain sequence of them, in different formations. It represents what I said, you are talking in circles vaguely about what you know not of.[/quote:a1603]
OK, looks like if it wasn't for dad we wouldn't know what fossils are. But fossils are not the only record that we see, geology has to offer many more.

[quote:a1603]
We go beyond creation week because there is a GAP in the YEC story... a gap which proves that the Earth is OLD!

The gap is in your head.[/quote:a1603]
I can't do anything else but laugh! I think plenty of people have proved you wrong: theologically, scientifically and logically. What you have is a skewed interpretation of the Bible, omitting major points which leads to the gap in your theory.

 

[dad]

But it's not in the Bible, it's in the Talmud which is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs, and history. All your theories are based on your imagination of what is in the Bible, and Seventh Heaven, for example, is NOT in the Bible.

No it isn't, any more than it is part of any so called theory of mine. It was raised to show the neat little box of so called three heavens you claim may not be all. You simply do not know, and the bible is not specific.
Ps 89:2 - For I have said, Mercy shall be built up for ever: thy faithfulness shalt thou establish in the very heavens.

1 Kings 8:27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded ?

Tell, us where is the heaven of heavens??

Seems like there is a gap in your theory.

Well, only in your head. There is no gap in creation, or the time since Adam, or anything else. You just seem to like harping on the word gap for some strange reason.

OK, looks like if it wasn't for dad we wouldn't know what fossils are. But fossils are not the only record that we see, geology has to offer many more.

Oh, thanks for that, we all thought it was only fossils. ..Point??? You talk in vague circles. There is, and get this in plain english here, NOTHING in any part of the record that is any problem, save in your head. So, if you want to offer something, make it concrete, and not in reference to some thoughts dancing around your own brain.

I can't do anything else but laugh!

Funny, I felt the same way on that one. Seems so obvious after it is said.

I think plenty of people have proved you wrong:

Well, you think wrong, totally. There is no proof for a same state future or past in science or the bible. Really.

theologically, scientifically and logically.

Nope, nothing remotely similar to your latest echoes, that sound out from inside your head. That is why you can't put anything on the table, and actually make a point, just accuse, insult, and quibble about nats that are important to you.

What you have is a skewed interpretation of the Bible, omitting major points which leads to the gap in your theory.

I understand you like to flog your pet theory, the gap theory. What that is, is a gap in faith beleiving the bible, and trying to invent a gap so it fits with science, in your mind. Work on that.

 

[Orion]

Much like you trying to invent psuedo-physics to fit your "theory" of a "pre-flood world" from your own imagination, because what we can clearly see doesn't match up with YOUR interpretation of the Bible. :-?

 

[love2live]

I understand you like to flog your pet theory, the gap theory. What that is, is a gap in faith beleiving the bible, and trying to invent a gap so it fits with science, in your mind. Work on that.

It's a gap in your understanding of the Bible, it's a gap in the Young Earth Creationists theory... that's what it simply is.
There has been nobody on this post that agrees with you, people tried to explain things to you, but you just refuse to understand.
People disagree with you on all perspectives: theological, logical and scientifical. If you were correct, there would have been at least one person that agrees with you, but there are none .

 

[dad]

I understand you like to flog your pet theory, the gap theory. What that is, is a gap in faith beleiving the bible, and trying to invent a gap so it fits with science, in your mind. Work on that.

It's a gap in your understanding of the Bible, it's a gap in the Young Earth Creationists theory... that's what it simply is.
There has been nobody on this post that agrees with you, people tried to explain things to you, but you just refuse to understand.
People disagree with you on all perspectives: theological, logical and scientifical. If you were correct, there would have been at least one person that agrees with you, but there are none .

If you want to try to explain something, it would not be smug and vague nonsense. Fact is, you got nothin. Thanks for stopping by to display it.

 

[love2live]

If you want to try to explain something, it would not be smug and vague nonsense. Fact is, you got nothin. Thanks for stopping by to display it.

As I said, you are not the judge, everybody else that came through has seen your theories and not even ONE person agrees... I think that that is sufficient to tell us who might be wrong and who might be right.

 

[IRONBARK]

In the Scriptures it states that the heavens cannot be measured and the host of heaven cannot be counted (Jer. 31:37; 33:22-25). If this is true then the material universe is vast beyond conception, and as God has existed from all eternity, "In the Beginning was the Word etc.," (John 1:1), and "In the beginning God created, etc., (Gen. 1:1), it is hard to concieve that He only decided a few millenniums ago to do something.

In answer to this question the Bible tells us that, "In the beginning [literally, by periods or ages] God created the heaven [Hebrew, heavens] and the earth," it does not say "Six thousand years ago God created the heavens and the earth," as is generally taught by man. Does anyone know just when the beginning was? If anyone does know, then they know more than God as revealed. If no one knows just when the beginning was then it stands to reason that we just do not know and therefore, we should not teach that the beginning was 6,000 years ago. As far as any man knows it could have been six billion years ago.

When we speak of the six days and the creation of the present life in Earth, we can speak with definate authority that it was 6,000 years ago. This can be seen by the lengths of the various dispensations since Adam.

Some teachers use Exodus 20:8-11; 31:17 to prove that the heavens and the Earth were created in the six days of Gen. 1:3-2:25, and therefore, that they were created about 6,000 years ago. However, nothing is said of the original creation of the heavens and the Earth in these passages. In these Scriptures the Hebrew, asah, meaning to make out of already existing material, is used instead of the word bara, to creat. These verses picture the re-creation work of the six days, and not the original creation "In the beginning." Asah never means to create.

Undoubtedly, God created and made the different parts of the material universe and each thing therein, using the same care as in the six days when He restored the planet Earth to a habitable state and made a new order of Earth creatures, after its destruction and ruin caused by the first war ever fought. This war was a cataclismic battle between God and Satan, when Lucifer invaded Heaven to cast God out. Satan was defeated and cast back down to the Earth, as is written in Isa. 14:12-14; Luke 10:18. This war was fought long before the days of Adam, for Lucifer was already a fallen creature when he came into Adams Eden. For an unknown period, there was an original social system on this Earth ruled by Lucifer as proved in (Isa. 14:12-14; 45:18; Jer. 4:23-26; Ezek. 28:11-17; 2 Pet. 3:5-7). Along with this origional social system there were land animals, birds, fish, and other creatures created, and they were destroyed in the flood of Gen. 1:2; Ps. 104:5-9; 2 Pet. 3:5-7. It is to this period that all fossils and remains of animals belong, as well as geological formations of the Earth.
Between these original creation's of God, "In the beginning' and the creations of the six days, is revealed the rule of Lucifer on the earth for an unknown period, his rebellion against God, the Earth's first sinful career, the defeat of Lucifer by God, and the overthrow of his kingdom by the first recorded flood on the earth in Gen. 1:2. Lucifer was the first ruler on the earth and he already had his period of Earth rule and his fall by the time of Adam.

In the work of the six days, it is stated that God with His hands FORMED each of the living creatures and man out of the dust of the ground (Gen. 1:20-27; 2:7-25; Job 26:13; Rom. 9:20; 1 Tim. 2:13). It is not only clear that God created the heavens and the Earth and all things "In the beginning," or each in its own period, but it is also clear the God FORMED all things with His hands. God formed both light anddarkness (Isa. 24:7). He did not do this on the first day of Gen 1:3-5, for at that time He merely DIVIDED them. Therefore THEY MUST HAVE BEEN CREATED AND FORMED before the first day. It is also stated that God with His hands FORMED the Earth (Ps. 8:3, 6; 90:2; 95:5); the heavens (Ps. 8:3; 9:1; 102:25; Isa. 40:12; the planets (Ps.8:3; Isa. 40:26; 45:12; 48:13; Heb. 1:10) and all things (Prov. 26:10). From a study of all these Scriptures and those on the creation af all things, it is clear that by the Word of God the materials were brought into existence, and then by His hands God formed the materials into the various parts of the universe. That is, as God spoke, the materials came into existence and as fast as they materialized He used them to form all things with His hands. (Ps. 8:3; 2 Pet. 3:3-9; Prov. 26:10).

Judging from what was done by God in six days, it took God a long time to originnaly create or bring into existence the material and use it to form with His hands each sun, moon, star, planet, and each creature that inhabits the vast endless universe. God took one day to merly divide the light from the darkness on this little planet Earth. How much time He originally took to bring into existence all the light and darkness of the entire universe is not known, but evidently He took a longer time than one day. God took one day to divide the waters which covered the Earth and restore the firmament and took one day to restore the earth and set bounds to the seas, therefore He naturally took a much longer period to originally bring the materials into existence and form the waters, the firmament, and the earth with its many mountains and valleys. God took one day to complete solar regulation in connection with the restored Earth, but He evidently used a much longer period to originally bring into existence and formwith His own hands the vast heavens and all the suns, moons, stars, and planets that are without number. God took two days to form the fish, fowls, beasts,, man and woman. He naturally took a much longer period to originally creat and form each inhabitant of the vast heavens and the many animals and inhabitants who originally lived on the Earth during Lucifer's kingdom, long before the chaos of Gen 1:2 and the six days of Gen.1:3-2-25.

In other words, if God took six days to restore one little planet to a habitable state and form new inhabitants for the earth, He would naturally take a much longer time to originally create and form with His hands the vast universe with all of its innumerable suns and planets along with their inhabitants.

"Therefore rejoice ye heavens, AND YE THAT DWELL IN THEM. (Rev. 12:12). "Therefore rejoice ye heavens, AND YE THAT DWELL IN THEM, But woe to the inhabiters of the earth, and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

Read this Scripture for yourself in any Bible:

"For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the Earth and made it, He created it not in vain, He created it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is no one else" (Isiah 45:18).

If there are no inhabitants throughout the universe, then this Scripture also is meaningless?

 

[dad]

As I said, you are not the judge, everybody else that came through has seen your theories and not even ONE person agrees... I think that that is sufficient to tell us who might be wrong and who might be right.

No one can disagree, because science really can't say, and I have a bible case among bible cases. I certainly can judge posts that are insulting, and do not detail anything, as smug and vague nonsense. Really. The gavel is down, that is where it is at. Maybe you could improve your act, and make some sort of point, or case. If not, remember, the ruling is in.

 

[dad]

In the Scriptures it states that the heavens cannot be measured and the host of heaven cannot be counted (Jer. 31:37; 33:22-25). If this is true then the material universe is vast beyond conception, and as God has existed from all eternity, "In the Beginning was the Word etc.," (John 1:1), and "In the beginning God created, etc., (Gen. 1:1), it is hard to concieve that He only decided a few millenniums ago to do something.

No, it is easy.

In answer to this question the Bible tells us that, "In the beginning [literally, by periods or ages] God created the heaven [Hebrew, heavens] and the earth," it does not say "Six thousand years ago God created the heavens and the earth," as is generally taught by man.

It does say how long Adam lived, and his descendants, however, and the info can be, and has been pieced together. Some people can count. The numbers, within a small margin of interpretation, are young earth.

Does anyone know just when the beginning was?

I do.

If anyone does know, then they know more than God as revealed.

No, creation week is revealed quite well. No need to imagine gaps for no apparent reason.

If no one knows just when the beginning was then it stands to reason that we just do not know and therefore, we should not teach that the beginning was 6,000 years ago. As far as any man knows it could have been six billion years ago.

The beginning of our universe is the beginning we are concerned with. That is known.

When we speak of the six days and the creation of the present life in Earth, we can speak with definate authority that it was 6,000 years ago. This can be seen by the lengths of the various dispensations since Adam.

Thank you, now, I hope the poster that tried to cast doubt on that is reading this.

Some teachers use Exodus 20:8-11; 31:17 to prove that the heavens and the Earth were created in the six days of Gen. 1:3-2:25, and therefore, that they were created about 6,000 years ago.

Great.

However, nothing is said of the original creation of the heavens and the Earth in these passages. In these Scriptures the Hebrew, asah, meaning to make out of already existing material, is used instead of the word bara, to creat. These verses picture the re-creation work of the six days, and not the original creation "In the beginning." Asah never means to create.

The beginning was on the first day.
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.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Undoubtedly, God created and made the different parts of the material universe and each thing therein,

Nope. I doubt there was a material universe! I think it was spiritual and physical. Otherwise it could not last forever, nor could Adam.

using the same care as in the six days when He restored the planet Earth to a habitable state and made a new order of Earth creatures, after its destruction and ruin caused by the first war ever fought.

Fantasy.

This war was a cataclismic battle between God and Satan, when Lucifer invaded Heaven to cast God out.

Fantasy, that this happened on day 1 of creation.

Satan was defeated and cast back down to the Earth, as is written in Isa. 14:12-14; Luke 10:18.

I see, so when he gets the boot in revelations, in the end time, is that because he forced his way back into heaven? Get serious.

This war was fought long before the days of Adam, for Lucifer was already a fallen creature when he came into Adams Eden.

Prove it. Even if that is true, long before does not mean day 1.

For an unknown period, there was an original social system on this Earth ruled by Lucifer as proved in (Isa. 14:12-14; 45:18; Jer. 4:23-26; Ezek. 28:11-17; 2 Pet. 3:5-7).

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished..
Why was not this the flood?

Along with this origional social system there were land animals, birds, fish, and other creatures created, and they were destroyed in the flood of Gen. 1:2; Ps. 104:5-9; 2 Pet. 3:5-7.

There was a flood, yes. So?

It is to this period that all fossils and remains of animals belong, as well as geological formations of the Earth.

Fossils, as I read the evidence are largely from before the flood. So?

Between these original creation's of God, "In the beginning' and the creations of the six days, is revealed the rule of Lucifer on the earth for an unknown period, his rebellion against God, the Earth's first sinful career, the defeat of Lucifer by God, and the overthrow of his kingdom by the first recorded flood on the earth in Gen. 1:2. Lucifer was the first ruler on the earth and he already had his period of Earth rule and his fall by the time of Adam.

Fantasy.

In the work of the six days, it is stated that God with His hands FORMED each of the living creatures and man out of the dust of the ground (Gen. 1:20-27; 2:7-25; Job 26:13; Rom. 9:20; 1 Tim. 2:13). It is not only clear that God created the heavens and the Earth and all things "In the beginning," or each in its own period, but it is also clear the God FORMED all things with His hands. God formed both light anddarkness (Isa. 24:7). He did not do this on the first day of Gen 1:3-5, for at that time He merely DIVIDED them.

Nope, first He made the light.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Then it was divided.

Therefore THEY MUST HAVE BEEN CREATED AND FORMED before the first day.

No, it is in the list of things done on the first day.

It is also stated that God with His hands FORMED the Earth (Ps. 8:3, 6; 90:2; 95:5); the heavens (Ps. 8:3; 9:1; 102:25; Isa. 40:12; the planets (Ps.8:3; Isa. 40:26; 45:12; 48:13; Heb. 1:10) and all things (Prov. 26:10). From a study of all these Scriptures and those on the creation af all things, it is clear that by the Word of God the materials were brought into existence, and then by His hands God formed the materials into the various parts of the universe. That is, as God spoke, the materials came into existence and as fast as they materialized He used them to form all things with His hands. (Ps. 8:3; 2 Pet. 3:3-9; Prov. 26:10).

So? No one says that as fast as they were made, He played play dough with it. Man wasn't formed till day 6. That means it was not as fast as materials were formed.

Judging from what was done by God in six days, it took God a long time to originnaly create or bring into existence the material and use it to form with His hands each sun, moon, star, planet, and each creature that inhabits the vast endless universe.

Nonsense. Besides, there are three persons in the Godhead, no? Maybe Jesus was the Hands on Man.

God took one day to merly divide the light from the darkness on this little planet Earth. How much time He originally took to bring into existence all the light and darkness of the entire universe is not known, but evidently He took a longer time than one day.

That is fantasy.

He naturally took a much longer period to originally creat and form each inhabitant of the vast heavens

What there are aliens in your theory now?

and the many animals and inhabitants who originally lived on the Earth during Lucifer's kingdom, long before the chaos of Gen 1:2 and the six days of Gen.1:3-2-25.

Fable.

In other words, if God took six days to restore one little planet to a habitable state and form new inhabitants for the earth, He would naturally take a much longer time to originally create and form with His hands the vast universe with all of its innumerable suns and planets along with their inhabitants.

I think we get the gist of your story, that doesn't help it any.

"Therefore rejoice ye heavens, AND YE THAT DWELL IN THEM. (Rev. 12:12). "Therefore rejoice ye heavens, AND YE THAT DWELL IN THEM, But woe to the inhabiters of the earth, and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

So???? The punk will be mad as a wet hornet in the end time, tough. He will have to get over it, we are going to clean his clock.

Read this Scripture for yourself in any Bible:

"For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the Earth and made it, He created it not in vain, He created it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is no one else" (Isiah 45:18).

Yes, He wanted it inhabited, and it will be. Multiplication is the name of the game.

If there are no inhabitants throughout the universe, then this Scripture also is meaningless?

Nope. There will be one day, we have a lot of mutlipying to do. Besides, in the spiritual universe, separate at the moment,there are untold millions, or billions, or sextillions, already alive and well. In the physical only universe, that is a temporary state, why, I would be surprised if there were many.

 

[love2live]

As I said, you are not the judge, everybody else that came through has seen your theories and not even ONE person agrees... I think that that is sufficient to tell us who might be wrong and who might be right.

No one can disagree, because science really can't say, and I have a bible case among bible cases. I certainly can judge posts that are insulting, and do not detail anything, as smug and vague nonsense. Really. The gavel is down, that is where it is at. Maybe you could improve your act, and make some sort of point, or case. If not, remember, the ruling is in.

No one can agree with your biblical interpretation (or your so called bible case). It only sounds offensive because you have taken the possibility that your opinion could be wrong too personally. That's the biggest problem: there are plenty of interpretations of the Bible, reading the same words that you are and there are many ways to interpret them. You claim that your interpretation is infallible , that can't be true not only because other people don't agree with your statements, but that can't be true because you are HUMAN, and as a HUMAN you are fallible!

When all you have is the interpretation of the Bible, and you have no other evidence, then the only other way to prove you wrong is to give another interpretation of the Bible. This is easy, because everybody interprets it differently, therefore you will (almost) never find anybody that agrees with you on every part.

As far as your claim that my argument is vague: I gave you an entire page to go over, so it is not my fault if you skipped most of it.
Cheers!

 

[dad]

No one can agree with your biblical interpretation (or your so called bible case). It only sounds offensive because you have taken the possibility that your opinion could be wrong too personally.

Nope, nothing like that. But it isn't about me, it is about ideas, and you don't really present any. I have, that can not be refuted.

That's the biggest problem: there are plenty of interpretations of the Bible, reading the same words that you are and there are many ways to interpret them. You claim that your interpretation is infallible , that can't be true not only because other people don't agree with your statements, but that can't be true because you are HUMAN, and as a HUMAN you are fallible!

Never claimed any such thing, why not make a point, rather than silly insults, and dancing around pretending you secretly have a point?

When all you have is the interpretation of the Bible, and you have no other evidence, then the only other way to prove you wrong is to give another interpretation of the Bible. This is easy, because everybody interprets it differently, therefore you will (almost) never find anybody that agrees with you on every part.

No, I find nothing of the sort. If you claim physics will be the same and was, prove it.

As far as your claim that my argument is vague: I gave you an entire page to go over, so it is not my fault if you skipped most of it.
Cheers!

If you mean about the stuff from Free, I addressed that. The margin of possible error is so small, that it matters not to a YEC position.

 

[love2live]

Never claimed any such thing, why not make a point, rather than silly insults, and dancing around pretending you secretly have a point?

What can I tell you? If you payed attention to the conversation you wouldn't think that I was insulting you and you wouldn't be trying to insult me.

When all you have is the interpretation of the Bible, and you have no other evidence, then the only other way to prove you wrong is to give another interpretation of the Bible. This is easy, because everybody interprets it differently, therefore you will (almost) never find anybody that agrees with you on every part.

No, I find nothing of the sort. If you claim physics will be the same and was, prove it.

You find nothing of the sort? You mean you don't find that mostly everybody else disagrees with your interpretation of the Bible? And I'm talking about the finer details, not general stuff like: Adam lived.

As far as your claim that my argument is vague: I gave you an entire page to go over, so it is not my fault if you skipped most of it.
Cheers!

If you mean about the stuff from Free, I addressed that. The margin of possible error is so small, that it matters not to a YEC position.

O.K. That explains why you keep insisting that my argument is vague, you obviously forgot about my full page post showing portions of the Gap theory. And you also forgot what Free was trying to tell you: the information that you're trying to use as a timetable is not in an absolute chronological order and it cannot be used to rightfully determine the age of the earth, not even to approximate it to the degree which you're trying to do. So if you think that my argument was vague, or other people's arguments are vague it's probably because you skipped most of them and you went right back to doing what you do best: making up your own reality.