Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > SPECIALTY FORUMS > Discussions of Faith
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-03-2016, 9:50 PM
TrailerparkTrash's Avatar
TrailerparkTrash TrailerparkTrash is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Over there
Posts: 4,245
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation650 View Post
1000 years. 2 Peter 3:8.
A "thousand" is mostly metaphor in the Bible. As for the word "day" or "days" in the creation account of Genesis, here's a great explanation I found online in its simplest form:

"The “days” of the creation week are divided into periods of light and darkness (vv. 4-5).The “days” are distinguished from “years” (v. 14). And the “days” are subsequently defined by Moses as the same type of “day” as the Sabbath which the Hebrews were required to observe (Ex. 20:11).There are other reasons for the view that the creation days must be literal, but this should suffice for the present."

Yes, as far as Genesis' explanation, I too believe in a literal six day (6- consecutive 24hour periods) time period for God's creation.
__________________


It`s funny to me to see how angry an atheist is over a God they don`t believe in.` -Jack Hibbs

-ΙΧΘΥΣ <><

Last edited by TrailerparkTrash; 12-03-2016 at 10:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-05-2016, 6:35 PM
ghostwong ghostwong is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montebello
Posts: 1,204
iTrader: 62 / 100%
Default

Gentlemen, First of all I want to thank you for taking to God's Word!

Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpens iron,
So one man sharpens another.

You may want to listen to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIJjZgp6XxU

I respect Dennis Prager and Hugh Ross, but I hold God was wiser and more powwerful than all. When we are in the present of God, all will be revealed.

God Bless!

Last edited by ghostwong; 12-05-2016 at 6:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:13 PM
WASR10's Avatar
WASR10 WASR10 is offline
Just Me
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,455
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billvau View Post
I'd be interested to know what Christ and Paul say that bring a 6 day creation into question. I'm preaching my final sections on this series tomorrow and will be covering Biblical Support.

Thanks!
Bill
[EDIT: There may have been some misunderstanding from my last post to you. I didn't make the claim that Christ or Paul brought the 6 day creation in to question, but reinforced it.]
I am sorry I didn’t get back to you in time, I usually take the weekend off from CalGuns. In examining what Jesus and Paul believed regarding creation, we have to look at their words from a conceptual view point. Jesus always spoke of creation (in how it relates to Genesis) in a literal sense; Mark 10:6 or Luke 11:50-51. In John 5:45-47 Jesus challenged his listeners regarding believing the writings of Moses in likeness to believing Him (If they would believe Christ, they should also believe what Moses had written). Regularly Jesus treated the accounts of Genesis as historical fact (Adam and Eve, Noah, etc….). Jesus, who spoke truth through allegory whenever appropriate, never did so when relaying wisdom of the early days of man and his relations with God.

As for Paul, in Acts 17:24–31, Paul says that every nation has come from one man. In 1 Corinthians 11:8, Paul writes that ‘man did not come from woman, but woman from man’. And in 15:45 and 47, as well as 1 Timothy 2:13–14 he refers to Adam as the First Created Man. These all indicate a literal understanding of Genesis.

I believe these examples give a stronger position that if a person believes these writings to be the Word of God, then a literal approach to Genesis is necessary. But I still believe there is enough space in these examples to allow for some valid points to the contrary.
__________________
Mark 16:16

Last edited by WASR10; 12-05-2016 at 8:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:18 PM
WASR10's Avatar
WASR10 WASR10 is offline
Just Me
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,455
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
I have sincere questions for anyone here who who professes to believe the Scriptures, but yet does not believe that the Lord created everything in six literal days as recorded in Genesis. Please consider what I present below and respond if you would like.

Consider:

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned - Romans 5:12

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 1 Corinthians 15:21

According to the Scriptures, death is the result of sin, and sin entered the world through the man Adam.

Questions:
  • If you subscribe to the "gap theory" or if you subscribe to any theory that posits that the days listed in Genesis are not literal days, doesn't your theory require that death began LONG BEFORE the day when Adam sinned?
  • Isn't any interpretation of Genesis 1 which does NOT interpret the days to be literal days guilty of violating the revealed truths that death is the result of sin and that sin entered the world through Adam?
  • How can you reconcile this contradiction between your interpretation of Genesis 1 and what the Scriptures reveal about death being the result of sin that entered the world through Adam?
More so as the Devil's advocate than anything, because I am not arguing the conclusion but more the premise, where do you see the difference between spiritual death and physical death playing a role in this line of thought and questioning?
__________________
Mark 16:16
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:30 PM
orangeusa's Avatar
orangeusa orangeusa is offline
Whatever
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Orange
Posts: 9,055
iTrader: 85 / 100%
Default

At the risk of being banned (again), I cannot subscribe to the simplistic 6 days and then he rested ... in the time frame we know as 24 hours.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/...enesis_en.html

It is clear that the Sun/Moon/stars were not situated until the 3rd day. No morning, no evening. They were created but not in play. And I am being ultra-literal here.

.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:33 PM
DRoberts12345's Avatar
DRoberts12345 DRoberts12345 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Tulare
Posts: 477
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

One day...... We will all know. Be patient
__________________
My worst day shooting is better than my best day at work.

The power of Gun free Zones https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=hnBWa_xJz6A


In California we're called "Wacko right-wing gun toting nut jobs with an arsenal" most other states just call us People.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:35 PM
orangeusa's Avatar
orangeusa orangeusa is offline
Whatever
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Orange
Posts: 9,055
iTrader: 85 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRoberts12345 View Post
One day...... We will all know. Be patient
I thought you had the ban hammer.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:37 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WASR10 View Post
More so as the Devil's advocate than anything, because I am not arguing the conclusion but more the premise, where do you see the difference between spiritual death and physical death playing a role in this line of thought and questioning?
For reasons beyond the scope of this discussion, I avoid using both the terms "spiritual death" and "physical death".

That said, according to the Scriptures, death did not exist before sin.

To clarify: are you suggesting that you believe death did exist before sin? If so, where would you find that in the Scriptures?
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b

Last edited by Not a Cook; 12-05-2016 at 8:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:44 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangeusa View Post
It is clear that the Sun/Moon/stars were not situated until the 3rd day. No morning, no evening. They were created but not in play. And I am being ultra-literal here.
According to Genesis 1:5 and 1:8, "evening" and "morning" pre-existed the sun, moon, and stars. It can make for a long discussion, but meditate on what these verses teach us and Genesis 1:14-16,
Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. Then 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.
There is much more to these verses than may, at first, seem apparent.
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:45 PM
DRoberts12345's Avatar
DRoberts12345 DRoberts12345 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Tulare
Posts: 477
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangeusa View Post
I thought you had the ban hammer.
No hammer here. I've only been banned once because someone misunderstood what I ment. I'm a pretty good boy most of the time
I believe the Bible says we will understand all when we get to heaven. That's why I say be patient.
__________________
My worst day shooting is better than my best day at work.

The power of Gun free Zones https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=hnBWa_xJz6A


In California we're called "Wacko right-wing gun toting nut jobs with an arsenal" most other states just call us People.

Last edited by DRoberts12345; 12-05-2016 at 8:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 12-05-2016, 8:48 PM
orangeusa's Avatar
orangeusa orangeusa is offline
Whatever
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Orange
Posts: 9,055
iTrader: 85 / 100%
Default

WRT post #50

I respectfully read that, and have studied it for years.

And stand by what I wrote. There is interpretation between the creation of dark and light, and when they were implemented.

I am clearly over my head here, so with that will relinquish this post.

.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 12-05-2016, 11:16 PM
MrBlond's Avatar
MrBlond MrBlond is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 338
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

A "day" is not 24 hours until the Earth settled into its orbit. What demarked a "day" when there was simply light separated from darkness? That was not our own sun. And a Lord's Day is not 1000 years, it is AS 1000 years. That is a simile. Not literal. It merely denotes that God's perception of time is on a vastly different scale from ours, and 1000 was a pretty big number to ancient agrarians.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-05-2016, 11:59 PM
orangeusa's Avatar
orangeusa orangeusa is offline
Whatever
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Orange
Posts: 9,055
iTrader: 85 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBlond View Post
A "day" is not 24 hours until the Earth settled into its orbit. What demarked a "day" when there was simply light separated from darkness? That was not our own sun. And a Lord's Day is not 1000 years, it is AS 1000 years. That is a simile. Not literal. It merely denotes that God's perception of time is on a vastly different scale from ours, and 1000 was a pretty big number to ancient agrarians.
I agree, as I believe it is more like 10^6, but you will not get much traction in this forum. I tried the same argument, probably less tactfully than you did.

.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-06-2016, 12:21 AM
TrailerparkTrash's Avatar
TrailerparkTrash TrailerparkTrash is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Over there
Posts: 4,245
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

On a side note and with this topic at hand, I feel compelled to put in my own .02cents worth of personal commentary on the matter...

One of the biggest paradigms some believers as well as most secularists dig themselves into, is assuming that the Bible "should be" able to have an answer to some, if not ALL of life's questions within the pages of the text itself. If they can't find the answer they're looking for, those same people believe that the Bible is somehow "contradictory" or "wrong" when it comes to things like the creation account, the flood, the Exodus, slavery, ethics, sin, time, space, physics, zoology, biology, mythology, the transfiguration, Satan, God, The Resurection, The Ascension, Israel, The 2nd Coming etc... take your pick.

Some tend to think or question the Bible's validity by pointing out in their own minds preconceived notions and misconceptions of presumed "contradictions," "errors," and/or "miscalculations" within the 66 books. Many vainly attempt to critically compare the Bible to a science text book of some sort.

I know that the Bible does NOT contradict itself. I realized long ago that the Bible is indeed NOT a science text book, nor was it ever intended to be portrayed as one. Taking it one step deeper, neither is it a book on zoology, biology, chemistry, physics, weather, nor medicine. It's not a self-help book on attaining "happiness" nor answers to one's financial problems. Lastly, the Bible is definitely NOT a book designed to fix all of societies problems!

But all of these things are real cognitive questions who's answers are important and often indisputable. So questions about God are of the same type. They are not scientific. If science in its endeavor fails to detect God, so what? Science in all of its power, is utterly incompetent to refute God.

Just because scientists don't see a cause, doesn't mean there isn't one. It just means science hasn't found it yet. Maybe someday they will.

In conclusion and keeping it all in perspective, the Bible was solely written for one thing and one thing only...

That is, TO POINT THE WAY TO SALVATION. Period.
__________________


It`s funny to me to see how angry an atheist is over a God they don`t believe in.` -Jack Hibbs

-ΙΧΘΥΣ <><
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 12-06-2016, 12:36 PM
Just Dave Just Dave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 7,259
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billvau View Post
For anyone who considers themselves a Christian: Do you believe in a Six Day Literal Creation? I'm just finishing a 3-week series on Creation and Sexual Sins as a perversion of the Genesis 1-2 account. It got me wondering how many Christians take Genesis as literally true as they do the New Testament, so I thought I'd ask.

I'm not here to fight, but, if there are questions, I'll try to answer (especially AFTER Sunday, when I'm done - have to teach both the sermon and Sunday School, maybe even doing music if our pianist isn't well yet). Even willing to answer (if not too long) why I believe in a six day creation.

What about you?

God bless,
Bill
Yes, 6 days literal

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangeusa View Post
Seriously, (since I don't want to get banned), isn't there some interpretation as to what a day is? ( WRT Old Testament passages ).

.
It's defined in the first few chapters
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 12-07-2016, 5:40 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
I have sincere questions for anyone here who who professes to believe the Scriptures, but yet does not believe that the Lord created everything in six literal days as recorded in Genesis. Please consider what I present below and respond if you would like.

Consider:

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned - Romans 5:12

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 1 Corinthians 15:21

According to the Scriptures, death is the result of sin, and sin entered the world through the man Adam.

Questions:
  • If you subscribe to the "gap theory" or if you subscribe to any theory that posits that the days listed in Genesis are not literal days, doesn't your theory require that death began LONG BEFORE the day when Adam sinned?
  • No it does not

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • Isn't any interpretation of Genesis 1 which does NOT interpret the days to be literal days guilty of violating the revealed truths that death is the result of sin and that sin entered the world through Adam?
  • Death is the result of sin and the length of creation has no bearing on that.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • How can you reconcile this contradiction between your interpretation of Genesis 1 and what the Scriptures reveal about death being the result of sin that entered the world through Adam?
There is no contradiction needing reconciliation.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:03 PM
billvau's Avatar
billvau billvau is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Norcal mountains
Posts: 816
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
No it does not


Death is the result of sin and the length of creation has no bearing on that.

There is no contradiction needing reconciliation.
What is your belief about creation and on what do you base it?

Thanks!
Bill
__________________
Pastor Bill

"Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason- I do not accept the authority of popes and councils [i.e. any man]- my conscience is captive to the Word of God." Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:04 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
I have sincere questions for anyone here who who professes to believe the Scriptures, but yet does not believe that the Lord created everything in six literal days as recorded in Genesis. Please consider what I present below and respond if you would like.

Consider:

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned - Romans 5:12

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 1 Corinthians 15:21

According to the Scriptures, death is the result of sin, and sin entered the world through the man Adam.

Questions:
  • If you subscribe to the "gap theory" or if you subscribe to any theory that posits that the days listed in Genesis are not literal days, doesn't your theory require that death began LONG BEFORE the day when Adam sinned?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
No it does not
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • Isn't any interpretation of Genesis 1 which does NOT interpret the days to be literal days guilty of violating the revealed truths that death is the result of sin and that sin entered the world through Adam?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Death is the result of sin and the length of creation has no bearing on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • How can you reconcile this contradiction between your interpretation of Genesis 1 and what the Scriptures reveal about death being the result of sin that entered the world through Adam?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
There is no contradiction needing reconciliation.
Now you've piqued my interest.

The "gap theory" requires death before Adam first sinned, and all "old earth theories" and "macro-evolutionary theories" likewise require death before Adam first sinned. What other theoretical interpretation exists of Genesis 1 which posits that the days of creation are not literal days and which theory does NOT also include death before Adam first sinned? Please be specific.
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:08 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I stated at least twice that I do not have firm belief on how creation, only that creation happened.
I know the very few words mentioned in the Bible concerning creation do not give sufficient information to build a dogmatic doctrine and they were not intended to.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:19 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
I stated at least twice that I do not have firm belief on how creation, only that creation happened.
Interesting... considering that you do not subscribe to any theoretical interpretation of Genesis 1, your "no" answer to my previous question doesn't make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
I know the very few words mentioned in the Bible concerning creation do not give sufficient information to build a dogmatic doctrine and they were not intended to.
^ How do you know this?

What other portions of the Scriptures likewise "do not give sufficient information to build a dogmatic doctrine and they were not intended to", and how do you know this?
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:22 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
[/LIST]







Now you've piqued my interest.

The "gap theory" requires death before Adam first sinned, and all "old earth theories" and "macro-evolutionary theories" likewise require death before Adam first sinned. What other theoretical interpretation exists of Genesis 1 which posits that the days of creation are not literal days and which theory does NOT also include death before Adam first sinned? Please be specific.
A few things:
1 Every gap theory I have heard relies on the literal 6 day creation. So throwing around "gap theory" as if it is a trump card hurts 6 day creation more than helps....
2. Old earth does not imply macro evolution. Macro evolution does not require death but that is irrelevant. You are conflating different things.

Again, Genesis 1 does not require the days to be interpreted as literal day. To start saying that because a person may not believe in the same interpretation of the word yom means all sorts of things that it doesn't is not honest.

We do not know how long Adam lived before Eve. We do not know how long Adam lived with Eve before he sinned. If Adam could have loved say 10,000 years before sinning. Why could not the 4th day been 1000 years with out there being death?

The burden is on you, not me.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns

Last edited by JeffC; 12-07-2016 at 6:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:28 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
Interesting... considering that you do not subscribe to any theoretical interpretation of Genesis 1, your "no" answer to my previous question doesn't make sense.
It makes perfect sense. You analysis is wrong. I point out a flawed theory with out knowing the write theory. That is how we use logic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
^ How do you know this?
I Study.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
What other portions of the Scriptures likewise "do not give sufficient information to build a dogmatic doctrine and they were not intended to", and how do you know this?
You are shifting the burden of justification on me when it belongs on you.
based upon your principles of hermeneutics a person can take any portion of scripture and build any doctrine they wish.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-07-2016, 6:51 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
Now you've piqued my interest.

The "gap theory" requires death before Adam first sinned, and all "old earth theories" and "macro-evolutionary theories" likewise require death before Adam first sinned. What other theoretical interpretation exists of Genesis 1 which posits that the days of creation are not literal days and which theory does NOT also include death before Adam first sinned? Please be specific.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
A few things:
1 Every gap theory I have heard relies on the literal 6 day creation. So throwing around "gap theory" as if it is a trump card hurts 6 day creation more than helps....
"Gap theory" posits MASSIVE death before the first day of creation, occurring specifically between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. After years of discussions, I have yet to meet someone who believes "gap theory" and who has ever considered that the Scriptures teach that death is the result of Adam's sin. "Gap theory" isn't a "trump card" at all, it's simply an aberrant teaching that doesn't come from the Scriptures and doesn't jive with what the whole counsel of God declares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
2. Old earth does not imply macro evolution. Macro evolution does not require death but that is irrelevant. You are conflating different things.
I'll ask again: what theoretical interpretation of Genesis 1 exists which BOTH posits that the days of creation week are not literal and also that death did not occur before Adam first sinned?

Also, I'm curious: what old earth theory does not involve macro-evolution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Again, Genesis 1 does not require the days to be interpreted as literal day. To start saying that because a person may not believe in the same interpretation of the word yom means all sorts of things that it doesn't is not honest.

We do not know how long Adam lived before Eve. We do not know how long Adam lived with Eve before he sinned. If Adam could have loved say 10,000 years before sinning. Why could not the 4th day been 1000 years with out there being death?
Umm... because it would contradict what Scripture tells us plainly. Besides the fact that language of Genesis 1 is quite straightforward, the Scriptures also tell us thus:

So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. Genesis 5:5

We also know that Adam was only 130 years old when Seth was born (ref. Genesis 5:3).
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
The burden is on you, not me.
The burden for what? To show that the Scriptures mean what they plainly state?
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b

Last edited by Not a Cook; 12-07-2016 at 6:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-07-2016, 7:27 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
"Gap theory" posits MASSIVE death before the first day of creation, occurring specifically between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. After years of discussions, I have yet to meet someone who believes "gap theory" and who has ever considered that the Scriptures teach that death is the result of Adam's sin. "Gap theory" isn't a "trump card" at all, it's simply an aberrant teaching that doesn't come from the Scriptures and doesn't jive with what the whole counsel of God declares.
I understand Gap theory and that most of those who adhere to it also adhere to the 144 hour model of creation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
I'll ask again: what theoretical interpretation of Genesis 1 exists which BOTH posits that the days of creation week are not literal and also that death did not occur before Adam first sinned?
Off the top of my head Day age theory which is the primary alternate theory to the 6 day creation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
Also, I'm curious: what old earth theory does not involve macro-evolution?
See above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
The burden for what? To show that the Scriptures mean what they plainly state?
The burden to justify your claim in the positive, not have someone falsify them.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-07-2016, 8:33 PM
Wordupmybrotha's Avatar
Wordupmybrotha Wordupmybrotha is offline
From anotha motha
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 6,950
iTrader: 62 / 100%
Default

Yep, 6 days. God said, I believe it.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-07-2016, 9:14 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
I'll ask again: what theoretical interpretation of Genesis 1 exists which BOTH posits that the days of creation week are not literal and also that death did not occur before Adam first sinned?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Off the top of my head Day age theory which is the primary alternate theory to the 6 day creation.
Sorry; that's incorrect. "Day-age theory" posits death BEFORE Adam first sinned. In other words, day-age theory contradicts the Scriptures I previously posted in post #39 and isn't a valid response to the question I asked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
The burden to justify your claim in the positive, not have someone falsify them.
My claim is that the plain, straightforward interpretation of Genesis is the correct interpretation.

Support for this claim has already been provided in this thread. As a brief summary of such support, please note the following:
  • "yom" - while this Hebrew term can denote time periods other than a literal day, it most certainly can also denote a literal day. More below as to why that is the correct understanding of "yom" in Genesis 1;
  • ordinal - each of the days of creation week are ordinal in Genesis 1 (e.g. "first" in Genesis 1:5, "second" in 1:8, "third" in 1:13, etc.). Everywhere else that "yom" occurs in an ordinal usage in the Scriptures, "yom" is understood to mean a literal day;
  • "evening and morning" - this, too, points to "yom" in Genesis 1 denoting a literal day since "evening and morning"
  • Lengths of time recorded in Genesis - Adam was only 130 years old when Seth was born (ref. Genesis 5:3). Seth was not born until sometime after Cain murdered Abel. Adam, therefore, was even younger than 130 years when Cain and Abel were born. Cain was not conceived until sometime after the fall and banishment from the Garden of Eden (ref. Gen. 3 and 4). Per Genesis 1:26-31, God made Adam on the sixth day. Therefore, Adam had lived through all of the following by the time that Adam was only 130 years old:
    - "the sixth day";
    - "the seventh day";
    - Adam's sin and banishment from Eden;
    - Eve's conception and pregnancy with Cain;
    - enough time for Cain and Abel to grow up;
    - the murder of Abel by Cain;
    - Eve's conception and pregnancy with Seth.

    IF each of the "yoms" in Genesis is an extended period and if we ignore completely the time necessary for the last four itemized events above to occur, then each "yom" could only be, AT MOST, 65 years per "yom" (130 years divided by the last two days of creation week). In reality, it would likely be no more than 57 or so years per "yom". The problem with this is that each of the theories that posit that "yom" in Genesis 1 means something other than a literal day do so in order to JAM PACK HUGE amounts of time into each "yom" in attempt to reconcile a belief in an "old earth" with Genesis 1. 65 years per "yom" in Genesis 1 (which it would be less considering the last four item in the above list) simply doesn't satisfy any of the "old earth" timelines.
  • 2 Peter 3:8 - this verse contains a simile. It does NOT state that a day IS a thousand years; it states, But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. Notice the "as". We know God revealed the details of creation week to Moses. He didn't say the days of Genesis were LIKE a "yom"; they ARE "yom"s. God gave specific instruction to Moses, and Moses accurately recorded that instruction in the Scriptures.

What has not been supported from the Scriptures is the belief that each "yom" in Genesis 1 denotes an EXTENDED PERIOD of time.
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-07-2016, 10:35 PM
Alan Block Alan Block is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,999
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

The original indeed says Yom as in day, when there is light.
יוֹם אֶחָד: - Yom echad - day one.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-08-2016, 6:11 AM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
Sorry; that's incorrect. "Day-age theory" posits death BEFORE Adam first sinned. In other words, day-age theory contradicts the Scriptures I previously posted in post #39 and isn't a valid response to the question I asked.
Day age theory does not contradict the scriptures. You keep repeating that, as if it is meaningless but it is not.
Apparently you have an interpretation you want to believe, and anything that challenges that interpretation is a challenge to your faith which you no doubt invested much time and effort in.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
My claim is that the plain, straightforward interpretation of Genesis is the correct interpretation.
I favor the contextual interpretation. I understand the distinction between what is being read the way a 21st century person would read the account instead of reading it the way the persons who lived at the time would have been reading it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
Support for this claim has already been provided in this thread. As a brief summary of such support, please note the following:
  • "yom" - while this Hebrew term can denote time periods other than a literal day, it most certainly can also denote a literal day. More below as to why that is the correct understanding of "yom" in Genesis 1;
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • ordinal - each of the days of creation week are ordinal in Genesis 1 (e.g. "first" in Genesis 1:5, "second" in 1:8, "third" in 1:13, etc.). Everywhere else that "yom" occurs in an ordinal usage in the Scriptures, "yom" is understood to mean a literal day;
  • I have heard this argument before and still am not convinced by it. It is more the same bad interpretive principles for two reasons. The first is that it is false. Isiah 9:14 and an ordinal before the word yom and that is clearly figurative as well as does Hosea 6 The second reason the argument does not hold water is the sample size of the verses with ordinal and yom is extremely small. Nothing more than an attempt to make up a rule because it defends a certain position.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • "evening and morning" - this, too, points to "yom" in Genesis 1 denoting a literal day since "evening and morning"
  • Again you fall prey to basic human narcissism. The Bible not a book to be read, it is a book that is meant to be studied. The truth is not in the plain meaning of the current version, but in the authors original intent. The Gospels do not follow a strict chronology because their intent was NOT to communicate a chronology of the life of Jesus, but a theme about the life of Jesus.
    Evening and morning
    NASB ore accurately translates the phrase as “And there was evening, and there was morning, the nth day.” The more literal translation indicates an ending activity, a beginning activity, followed by a number.

    Hebrew words for “evening” (ereb) and “morning” (boquer) can have several meanings:ereb: “sunset”, “night”, “at the turn of the evening” meaning a gradual diminishing of activity
    boquer: “dawn”, “daybreak”, “beginning of day”, or “the point at which night is changing to day” or start of a new creative activity.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • Lengths of time recorded in Genesis - Adam was only 130 years old when Seth was born (ref. Genesis 5:3). Seth was not born until sometime after Cain murdered Abel. Adam, therefore, was even younger than 130 years when Cain and Abel were born. Cain was not conceived until sometime after the fall and banishment from the Garden of Eden (ref. Gen. 3 and 4). Per Genesis 1:26-31, God made Adam on the sixth day. Therefore, Adam had lived through all of the following by the time that Adam was only 130 years old:
    - "the sixth day";
    - "the seventh day";
    - Adam's sin and banishment from Eden;
    - Eve's conception and pregnancy with Cain;
    - enough time for Cain and Abel to grow up;
    - the murder of Abel by Cain;
    - Eve's conception and pregnancy with Seth.

    IF each of the "yoms" in Genesis is an extended period and if we ignore completely the time necessary for the last four itemized events above to occur, then each "yom" could only be, AT MOST, 65 years per "yom" (130 years divided by the last two days of creation week). In reality, it would likely be no more than 57 or so years per "yom". The problem with this is that each of the theories that posit that "yom" in Genesis 1 means something other than a literal day do so in order to JAM PACK HUGE amounts of time into each "yom" in attempt to reconcile a belief in an "old earth" with Genesis 1. 65 years per "yom" in Genesis 1 (which it would be less considering the last four item in the above list) simply doesn't satisfy any of the "old earth" timelines.
  • 2 Peter 3:8 - this verse contains a simile. It does NOT state that a day IS a thousand years; it states, But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. Notice the "as". We know God revealed the details of creation week to Moses. He didn't say the days of Genesis were LIKE a "yom"; they ARE "yom"s. God gave specific instruction to Moses, and Moses accurately recorded that instruction in the Scriptures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
What has not been supported from the Scriptures is the belief that each "yom" in Genesis 1 denotes an EXTENDED PERIOD of time.
The creation sabbath is still in effect. There was no end to the Sabbath day. There was no morning or evening. That shoots a pretty big hole in your itemized theory.

If you do not like 2nd Peter here is a very small synopsis of the use of the word yom:
Time:
Genesis 4:3, it says "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord." In this instance, Yom refers to a growing season, probably several months. Again, in Deuteronomy 10:10, it refers to a "time" equal to forty days. In I Kings 11:42, it says "And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was forty years." In this case, Yom translated as the word "time" is equivalent to a 40 year period.

In Isaiah 30:8, it says "Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever." In this case, Yom is equal to "forever." How long is forever? An infinite number of years...billions upon billions upon billons of years. If Yom can equal trillions of years here, then why not billions of years in Genesis?

Four times in the Old Testament Yom is translated "year." Important for you to note the use of the ordinal in conjunction with yom. In I Kings 1:1, "David was old and stricken in years..." In 2 Chronicles 21:19, "after the end of two years" and in the very next verse "Thirty and two years old." Finally, in Amos 4:4, "...and your tithes after three years." In each case, Yom represents years, not days.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-08-2016, 6:23 AM
glassparman's Avatar
glassparman glassparman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Mojave
Posts: 672
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

If GOD can even begin to create life as we know it, which I believe he did, then why can't he create everything in 6 days? Our ways are not his ways. We can't even begin to understand the universe or life itself so why try to understand how he did it??

The Bible is meant to teach us so why would GOD inspire his prophets to record it as 6 days if it was anything else??
__________________
"There is no greater feel than to be in control of 56 tons of steel and watching that 105mm round go down range and blow something up."
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-08-2016, 7:58 AM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glassparman View Post
If GOD can even begin to create life as we know it, which I believe he did, then why can't he create everything in 6 days? Our ways are not his ways. We can't even begin to understand the universe or life itself so why try to understand how he did it??

The Bible is meant to teach us so why would GOD inspire his prophets to record it as 6 days if it was anything else??

He could create creation in 6 milliseconds if he wanted to.

God did not inspire his prophets to record a literal 6 day creation. Your modern translation may or may not infer that it is a literal 6 day(24 hour) creation but the text does not.

If you want to jump to Genesis 2 the bible says creation happened in a single day. "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," which directly refutes Genesis 1.

Could Genesis 1 be a little 6 day (24h) recorded, yes it could. Is there enough evidence from the text to be dogmatic about it? No way!
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 12-08-2016, 8:06 AM
mike.h's Avatar
mike.h mike.h is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: IDAHOME :)
Posts: 1,553
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankm View Post
What is a day to God?
this
__________________
USAF 1966-70
SEA '69-70
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 12-08-2016, 9:22 AM
billvau's Avatar
billvau billvau is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Norcal mountains
Posts: 816
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike.h View Post
this
Answer: It's 24 hours in Genesis 1-2.
__________________
Pastor Bill

"Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason- I do not accept the authority of popes and councils [i.e. any man]- my conscience is captive to the Word of God." Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 12-08-2016, 10:03 AM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billvau View Post
Answer: It's 24 hours in Genesis 1-2.
Do you mean the individual creation days in Genesis 1 or the creation day in Genesis 2?
How can 6 individual 24 hour periods also be a single 24 hour period?
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 12-08-2016, 11:14 AM
Fetterly Powders Fetterly Powders is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor/Vendor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Petaluma,
Posts: 331
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Looks to me and some of my biggest Bible teaching heroes embrace the strong possibility of the gap. God creates the Earth. Seems to be a great catastrophe between v2 and 3. Darkness upon the face of the deep indicates an absence of God.Without form, tohu meaning a ruin,,void,bohu meaning emptiness [we lose real meanings with our english translations] Now say the verse with those true words, 'and the earth was ruined,destroyed and empty'... Is45;18 says He did not create the world in vain. Looks to me like something happened. Maybe Rev9 I saw a star fall from heaven[ satan hitting the earth, messing it all up].. Just a thought. I teach the youth about it but to look into it themselves. End result is always people looking into His Word...a good thing!
Doug
__________________
Douglas Fetterly
Fetterly Powders & Optics
(707)292-0800

Last edited by Fetterly Powders; 12-08-2016 at 11:18 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 12-08-2016, 2:16 PM
billvau's Avatar
billvau billvau is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Norcal mountains
Posts: 816
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Do you mean the individual creation days in Genesis 1 or the creation day in Genesis 2?
How can 6 individual 24 hour periods also be a single 24 hour period?
Six, 24hr days. Numbered, evening and morning. Plus, a ton of other Hebrew grammatical structure as well as biblical support. The Hebrew grammar is so strong, that there can be no "gaps" in the six day creation. The Holy Spirit knew exactly how to structure the text so that it only adds up to six, literal 24 hour days, and then a day of rest.
__________________
Pastor Bill

"Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason- I do not accept the authority of popes and councils [i.e. any man]- my conscience is captive to the Word of God." Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 12-08-2016, 2:29 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 322
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billvau View Post
Six, 24hr days yoms. Numbered, evening and morning beginning and end. Plus, a ton of other Hebrew grammatical structure as well as biblical support. The Hebrew grammar is so strong, that there can be no "gaps" in the six day creation. The Holy Spirit knew exactly how to structure the text so that it only adds up to six, literal 24 hour days, and then a day of rest.
Fixed it for you
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 12-08-2016, 4:59 PM
billvau's Avatar
billvau billvau is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Norcal mountains
Posts: 816
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Fixed it for you
Actually, it was Biblically correct as I wrote it. Have you ever studied Genesis in Hebrew? Translated it? Diagrammed it? worked through the lexical and syntactical issues? How many commentaries do you have on Genesis (and used - especially exegetical ones written for the Hebrew text?) How many books on creation? Ever taught Genesis 1 to a body of believers and answered their questions? In other words, are you qualified to debate the issue?

Just wondering...
__________________
Pastor Bill

"Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason- I do not accept the authority of popes and councils [i.e. any man]- my conscience is captive to the Word of God." Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 12-08-2016, 5:15 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Day age theory does not contradict the scriptures. You keep repeating that, as if it is meaningless but it is not.
Apparently you have an interpretation you want to believe, and anything that challenges that interpretation is a challenge to your faith which you no doubt invested much time and effort in.
To clarify: you are aware of some version of the "day-age theory" that does not include death occurring before Adam first sinned - is that correct?

If that is correct, please direct me to some information regarding this particular version of the "day-age theory" as I haven't yet come across it. All the versions of "day-age theory" that I've previously encountered originate from attempts to reconcile/harmonize "old earth" timelines (which involve death before the advent of man) with Genesis 1. If there's another version floating around out there, I would very much appreciate your help in learning about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
I favor the contextual interpretation. I understand the distinction between what is being read the way a 21st century person would read the account instead of reading it the way the persons who lived at the time would have been reading it.
I, too, favor contextual interpretation. We must always consider the context of each passage we study, both the immediate context as well as the whole counsel of God.

In light of your favoring contextual interpretation, please consider the following passage:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. Exodus 20:8-11

It is obvious that the "...six days you shall labor..." speaks of literal days, as does "... the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God." In the very same, immediate context, we read, "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day." If the "six days" and the "seventh day" are literal, then so must the days of creation which are mentioned in the same context as the justification/basis for keeping the Sabbath day holy be likewise literal days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
I have heard this argument before and still am not convinced by it. It is more the same bad interpretive principles for two reasons. The first is that it is false. Isiah 9:14 and an ordinal before the word yom and that is clearly figurative as well as does Hosea 6 The second reason the argument does not hold water is the sample size of the verses with ordinal and yom is extremely small. Nothing more than an attempt to make up a rule because it defends a certain position.
Fine; don't accept "this argument". But consider my previous point regarding Exodus 20:8-11.

If you really "favor the contextual interpretation", how do you get anything but a literal day for "yom" in Exodus 20:8-11?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
Again you fall prey to basic human narcissism.
I'll admit that. Unfortunately, I have far too much pride; thankfully, the Lord isn't done with changing me yet. We all "fall prey to basic human narcissim" and will continue to do so until we are in His presence. But that's a little off-topic, isn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
The Bible not a book to be read, it is a book that is meant to be studied.
Umm... the Scriptures are meant to be read AND studied AND (most importantly) DONE (ref. James 1:22 and Matthew 7:21-29).

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
The truth is not in the plain meaning of the current version, but in the authors original intent.
I don't want to read too much into what you wrote here as similar statements are made by folks with very different intended meanings, and I'm not sure which specific meaning you have in mind. Suffice it to say for the discussion as hand, I hope we can agree that the plain meaning of the text is true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
The Gospels do not follow a strict chronology because their intent was NOT to communicate a chronology of the life of Jesus, but a theme about the life of Jesus.
Umm... true, but where they indicate chronology, such chronology is always historically accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
The creation sabbath is still in effect. There was no end to the Sabbath day. There was no morning or evening. That shoots a pretty big hole in your itemized theory.
Hmm... I'm not sure where you find this in the Scriptures. Following that line of reasoning and considering Exodus 20:8-11, wouldn't it seem then that the Israelites are commanded to then cease from all work forever after only six days?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
If you do not like 2nd Peter here is a very small synopsis of the use of the word yom:
Time:
Genesis 4:3, it says "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord." In this instance, Yom refers to a growing season, probably several months. Again, in Deuteronomy 10:10, it refers to a "time" equal to forty days. In I Kings 11:42, it says "And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was forty years." In this case, Yom translated as the word "time" is equivalent to a 40 year period.
I like 2nd Peter just fine (in fact, more than "just fine"). But even if I didn't, why would that be relevant? It is a simile. I remember in elementary school learning what a simile is and what it isn't; unfortunately, a lot of folks forget what a simile ISN'T when they go to 2 Peter 3:8. Time is irrelevant to God, a day is as a thousand years considering that He exists beyond the limits of time (but that's a topic for another discussion).

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC View Post
In Isaiah 30:8, it says "Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever." In this case, Yom is equal to "forever." How long is forever? An infinite number of years...billions upon billions upon billons of years. If Yom can equal trillions of years here, then why not billions of years in Genesis?
Why not? Because of what I wrote previously:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post
  • Lengths of time recorded in Genesis - Adam was only 130 years old when Seth was born (ref. Genesis 5:3). Seth was not born until sometime after Cain murdered Abel. Adam, therefore, was even younger than 130 years when Cain and Abel were born. Cain was not conceived until sometime after the fall and banishment from the Garden of Eden (ref. Gen. 3 and 4). Per Genesis 1:26-31, God made Adam on the sixth day. Therefore, Adam had lived through all of the following by the time that Adam was only 130 years old:
    - "the sixth day";
    - "the seventh day";
    - Adam's sin and banishment from Eden;
    - Eve's conception and pregnancy with Cain;
    - enough time for Cain and Abel to grow up;
    - the murder of Abel by Cain;
    - Eve's conception and pregnancy with Seth.

    IF each of the "yoms" in Genesis is an extended period and if we ignore completely the time necessary for the last four itemized events above to occur, then each "yom" could only be, AT MOST, 65 years per "yom" (130 years divided by the last two days of creation week). In reality, it would likely be no more than 57 or so years per "yom". The problem with this is that each of the theories that posit that "yom" in Genesis 1 means something other than a literal day do so in order to JAM PACK HUGE amounts of time into each "yom" in attempt to reconcile a belief in an "old earth" with Genesis 1. 65 years per "yom" in Genesis 1 (which it would be less considering the last four item in the above list) simply doesn't satisfy any of the "old earth" timelines.
In other words, even IF each "yom" in Genesis 1 wasn't a literal day but was instead some extended period of time (a maximum of 65 years/"yom" as demonstrated by the remainder of Genesis), then you could potentially/theoretically have the entire creation week in Genesis 1 extending out to a maximum of 455 years. But why do this? 455 years certainly won't satisfy any "old earth" timelines, and it simply can't reconcile/harmonize Genesis 1 with any "progressive creationism" or marcro-evolutionary theory timetable. So... what would the motivation be to try to extend each "yom" in Genesis 1?

JeffC - I'm really not trying to annoy you. I'm a very simple person and am grateful that God has chosen to make known to a weak, foolish, simple "babe" like me the amazing truth of His gospel (ref. Luke 10:21 and 1 Corinthians 1:26-31). I take the Word of God at face value, and yes I do study it and study it (perhaps more than I let on in this thread) and am amazed at how rich are the depths of His word.

I take "yom" in Genesis 1 to mean "literal day" for several reasons which I've previously listed. I can't get my simple head around any other meaning for "yom" in Exodus 20:8-11. I can't understand why so many folks posit "yom" in Genesis 1 to mean LONG periods of time and filling in those periods with old earth theories that include death occurring before Adam first sinned. I know that the majority of "day-age theory" adherents hold to "day-age theory" in order to attempt to reconcile/harmonize old earth timelines with Genesis 1.

That said, I have a question for you: why don't you understand "yom" in Genesis 1 to be a literal day? Are you motivated by wanting to reconcile/harmonize a belief in an old earth with Genesis 1? Or is something else? What originally made you think to inject some long period of time into something that the Bible translators wrote as "day"?
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 12-08-2016, 5:29 PM
Not a Cook Not a Cook is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fetterly Powders/Optics View Post
Looks to me and some of my biggest Bible teaching heroes embrace the strong possibility of the gap. God creates the Earth. Seems to be a great catastrophe between v2 and 3. Darkness upon the face of the deep indicates an absence of God.Without form, tohu meaning a ruin,,void,bohu meaning emptiness [we lose real meanings with our english translations] Now say the verse with those true words, 'and the earth was ruined,destroyed and empty'... Is45;18 says He did not create the world in vain. Looks to me like something happened. Maybe Rev9 I saw a star fall from heaven[ satan hitting the earth, messing it all up].. Just a thought. I teach the youth about it but to look into it themselves. End result is always people looking into His Word...a good thing!
Doug
Hi Doug - one of my favorite teachers of the Scriptures also embraced the "gap theory", so I can very much relate. I, too, have taught folks about "gap theory", but nowadays I'm careful to point out the fundamental problem with the theory that many folks aren't even aware of.

For reasons I won't go into here, the events of Revelation 9 can't have occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 (but that might best be a discussion for another time).

SOMETHING could have theoretically happened between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 given the Hebrew terms used. However, it is equally important to remember that even IF something did happen between these first two verses, God has not seen fit to reveal it to us and what may be taught about "gap theory" is (at best) human conjecture without revelation from God. People teach VERY specific details about what supposedly happened during this supposed "gap", and in my experience those very specific details come from sources outside the Scriptures which are then used as "tools" for interpreting what the Scriptures do record. This is, at best, dangerous, for obvious reasons. In falls into the category of eisogesis rather than exegesis.

That said, all of the versions of "gap theory" that I've come across posit MASSIVE death occurring between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. What adherents to this teaching haven't considered (in my experience) is that the Scriptures teach us elsewhere that death entered the cosmos through Adam's first sin (which obviously didn't happen until after Genesis 1:2). In other words, any theory which involves death (let alone the MASSIVE death theorized by many "gap theory" adherents) before Adam's first sin is contradicting what Scripture teaches.

^ Just something to consider.
__________________
Regarding the 2nd Amendment:
"...to disarm the people ― that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason ("The Father of the Bill of Rights")

Regarding Life and Death:
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

The BIG question: "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" Matthew 27:22b
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 12-08-2016, 5:43 PM
billvau's Avatar
billvau billvau is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Norcal mountains
Posts: 816
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not a Cook View Post

SOMETHING could have theoretically happened between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 given the Hebrew terms used. However, it is equally important to remember that even IF something did happen between these first two verses, God has not seen fit to reveal it to us and what may be taught about "gap theory" is (at best) human conjecture without revelation from God. People teach VERY specific details about what supposedly happened during this supposed "gap", and in my experience those very specific details come from sources outside the Scriptures which are then used as "tools" for interpreting what the Scriptures do record. This is, at best, dangerous, for obvious reasons. In falls into the category of eisogesis rather than exegesis.
What about the "Hebrew terms used" makes you think that something could've happened between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? I've never heard that before and the first term of 1:2 grammatically rules that out.

I'm really interested to know what you're seeing! Thanks.
__________________
Pastor Bill

"Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason- I do not accept the authority of popes and councils [i.e. any man]- my conscience is captive to the Word of God." Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:02 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy