Tolken

Enoch2021: Presume was intended...but that was an aside. As to the "conundrum" it is my belief that each creative pronouncement imbued God's laws into the creation processes ordained. I certainly agree on the 1rst not so sure on the timing of the 2nd...however, it is obvious that our interpretation of Genesis 1 differs, considerably, but not as to the main point. Though you dismiss the "fiats" they are strikingly plain to me as is the structure of the passage. And yes, it was accidently on purpose that I did not respond to your multiple choice questions, as you did on my response regarding "dust". Hardly important in the overall. I simply came here to discuss varying views and to defend my opinions, interpretations, and thoughts...and perhaps in the process consider other perspectives. Your new thread on "Spiral Galaxies" I trust many will find engaging, I don't want to get caught up in merry go-round arguments where both sides can debate till "the cows come home". I may be one of the few that believes that after sufficient study "scientists" will come to appropriate conclusions. I noted that you were in the military and I thank you for your service to this country and us.

Enochbethany wrote: It hath been said by men of new: "This is mere assertion....any laws were suspended". Does anyone have a Bible passage where any such thing as "scientific law" is mentioned? I made the silly assumption that there was in fact some order to the earth and universe. I foolishly believed God to be the creator of order, logic, and "laws" (science & nature) that we mere humans could come to discern. I believed, again foolishly, that the various disciplines with their associated "laws" were not arbitrary. Jeremiah 33:25 ... Job 38:33, actually it is interesting that Science, it's adherents, upholds the "regularity" of scientific law but I presume that many Christians believe God created a universe of disorder, chaos, and arbitrariness. Interesting....

Enoch2021 wrote: "Only Adam from the human kind was made from dust". Ecc. 3:20 "all come from dust and to dust all return." Psalm 103:14 "...for he knows how we are formed, he remembers that we are dust". It would be logical to conclude that we all, as well as animals, come from dust. Childbirth is fairly common in my "neck of the woods", though the birth of a child is miraculous, I assume all means all. Interesting too ...that birth involves a process. Enoch2021 wrote: "You also have to explain the phrase..." Perhaps I should explain "fiat" as my use essentially means a decree, sometimes I use command. It seems obvious, at least to me, that a "plain" reading of Genesis 1 states that "And God said" is the one and only operative of creation, do you see something different? Now, what does this mean to you...Psalm 33:6 or Hebrews 11:3? I'm surprised that more people don't see any significance in Genesis 1 relative to "And God said", don't you? Also, no need for me "to take a crack" at Exodus 20:11 because nowhere have I intimated or suggested anything other than 6 days. I do not necessarily believe that one must hold God to consecutive days, and further the fulfillment is of indefinite time spans. I happen to believe that what God ordains, decrees, commands will come to pass. We already addressed the "incipient powers, elements and material" as to the natural processes God ordained. As way of illustration of my "preposterous" statements a brief look at verse 9. A "plain" reading of the text does not state "And God said, Let there be land". Rather the terms depicts processes just as in other verses such as 11,20, 24... If one chooses to read some geology, which I no longer wish to do, they will find that the basic rocks forming continents to be quite different from those found at the ocean floor. Also, the ocean crust is something like 5 miles thick whereas continental thickness can be to 40 miles thick. All this arrives us to state that the process involved in verse 9 would require time...a bit more than 24 hours. That is unless one chooses to believe that God suspended the laws He had instituted at the time of creation...which you are welcome to believe. (And we needn't play games with a multiple choice quiz)

Enoch2021 wrote: "Only Adam was created from dust, Love. And most importantly for our discussion ... in VIOLATION of all known "scientific" laws. Yet, Genesis 2:19 states that God "had formed out of the ground all of the beasts of the field, and all the birds of the air". (Also, Ecc. 3:20) Perhaps "Let the land produce living creatures"? Enoch2021 wrote: "...I'm not saying the laws didn't exist...I'm saying they were not the same during the Creation week as they are today...they weren't fixed. This is mere assertion as there is no scriptural support that any laws were suspended. I can assert that the laws of nature and the processes of all life were all created at God's command... not necessary at all to suspend any "laws". I see no scriptural prohibitive from suggesting that each fiat day expressed the incipient powers, the appropriate elements and material to accomplish God's command, and that the accomplishment was done in the framework of the "laws" God created at the beginning. The interpretation of Genesis as having a specific structure is demonstrably true, is it not? As I've written a number of times the ONLY operative that Genesis states is that "God said". "God made" is explanatory, fulfillment imposes no time frame, and yes I am able to assert that given the laws of nature indefinite time is not only possible but probable. The Biblical text nowhere states the completion of the "fiat" on the given day, Beyond the "Fiat" is independent explanation not the narrative proper.

Thank You..............still can't copy and paste for some reason? Maybe in time.

Enoch2021 - I am quite familiar with Fallacies and will simply suggest that no appeal to popularity is being made. Unless of course you can show me that the majority of biblical scholars hold this view. I would hope that few base their thoughts, ideas, and opinions without some appeal to authority, or should I say proper authority. I would look forward to a response from Shiloh....time for many of us is of the essence. Here is an appeal to popularity for you... the majority of Christian apologists would agree with Machen on the retreat of Christian academics in the public forum in the early and mid twentieth century. It was hardly irrelevant then nor is it now in the world of today when the Christian worldview is losing the battles for minds, and ultimately hearts.

Enoch2021 - Sorry not able to properly use quotes. As to your "argument to popularity" I would suggest that each of us accumulates our knowledge base from what we've read and learned...so that argument may find us all guilty. Further you will note that I stated that certain Biblical scholars "supported" this, it was simply a demonstration of support from authority. As to support for "indefinite time spans" I would simply suggest that we do have some knowledge of such things as gestation periods. Also, if "And God said" is the sole operative, which clearly it is, then how does it not stand to reason that what follows is explanatory? God did not say "Let living creatures come into being" rather He said "Let the land produce living creatures" ...I would trust that implies strongly other than immediate creation. As for science and star distances there exist myriad sites for the further explanations you seem to require. I have little interest in simply copy and pasting what you are more then able to research on your own. As you doubt the information anyway why get into an infinite regress of futility. As for Machen I believe his intent was to show that science is not antithetical to Christian beliefs. I believe other Christians such as Francis Schaeffer made similar points regarding Christian retreat in the early 20th century.

Sheniy - Yes, I think "creationist" is the proper fence to sit upon, too. I do believe however what Machen said so many years ago is very relevant today. We often attempt to diminish the accomplishments of science while at the same time we are steeped every day in scientific advancements...a bit hypocritical. A sufficiently delicate (GKC) reading of Genesis 1 does quite clearly reveal a structure. First, plainly stated is that God spoke (And "God said"), not that God had made or done but simply commanded. Ultimately the origin of all things rests solely on the "Word of God". Clearly then all that follows after "And God said" is an explanation. The notion that fulfillment was immediate is not required ... we do realize that God's commands will be fulfilled, in His time.

Sheniy - First I apologize as it has been many years since I have been involved on a forum. I attempted to "Quote" your question with no success...and I see unable to copy and paste from whatever past notes I have in my email draft folder. Aside from all that....Yes, I believe that the sun, moon, etc. became visible on the fourth day. I believe that Genesis 1:1 clearly establishes that all the fundamental laws of physics (nature), and the incipient God ordained natural processes were manifested. This I believe is a plain reading of the text.

Though perhaps "light" poses a more difficult area in understanding the Genesis 1 creative sequence there are reasonable possibilities. It has been noted that the use of "asah" does not necessarily imply "create" but rather produced from existing material. Genesis 1:1strongly suggests an all encompassing act of creation of everything in the universe. Any number of Bible scholars ( Archer, Walker, Grudem, Harris, Boise, etc.) support this reading as it pertains to the fourth day. So that the sun, moon, and stars became visible on the fourth day. Again, a direct reading of Genesis certainly supports indefinite time for God's commands to be accomplished as by the fulfillments as explanatory. One is certainly welcome to doubt the accumulated knowledge of science as regards - star distances and age of the universe. I would think to do so would require demonstrating the flaws in parallax, stellar motion, inverse-square law, etc. and essentially question geometry and math. "We cannot with consistency employ the printing press, the railroad, the telegraph,(we would say computers, GPS, Jets, and iPhones) in the propagation of our gospel, and at the same time denounce as evil those activites of the human mind that produced these things." J Gresham Machen

It has been many years since being involved in a forum. I never had problems copying from an email to a post...is there a simple way?

I am new to this forum, and in my recent move am unable to find my notes on this and various other subjects. So with such excuses out of the way let me just give a brief overview of an OEC/evolutionary reading of Gen. 1: A close reading of Genesis does not have God doing anything but speaking, "And God said". The only creative operative is a command, fiat, and that alone. The sole source of activity with regards to creation was quite simply that God spoke. Beyond the fiat "God made..." is simply explanation and no immediacy of creation should be invoked. Fulfillment is not immediate but explanatory allowing time frames and overlap with a 6 days of commands.