Genesis 1:2

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Can you point to one question that cannot be answered without a complete reliance on pure speculation or assumption?    Why do you want answers to questions you know that no one alive today can actually answer.?

 

Looking at Genesis 1:2 this way, asking these questions, are the reason I first questioned the validity of the YEC interpretation of Genesis 1, why I eventually turned away from that intepretation, and why I cannot return to it.

 

But nothing you are asking about has anything to the claims made by either YEC or OEC.   

 

There are all kinds of questions about things in the Bible that we have no clear definitive answers to.  Questions about God and where He came from and all kinds of things about biblical history that no one has ever been able figure out.  

 

Should we give up on the Bible because we have no answers to those questions???

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Pember is putting forth the tired old myth about the Gap Theory where there is a huge gap of millions upon millions of years between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2.   It can be demonstrated biblically to be false on every claim it makes.  

 

Well,so far, it offers the best answers.

 

I'm up for alternatives.

 

 

So you think it offers the best answers?   Riddle me this, then.   Explain why God would completely destroy a pre-adamite human race for sin insetead of offering them a plan of redemption?

 

On its very face, it contradicts the redemptive nature of God that He would judge a race of human beings and provide them no hope, no love, no future, no forgiveness, no plan of salvation, nothing.

 

Evidently you have not really thought this unbiblcial Gap Theory through very well.    The Gap Theory is an affront to the very nature of God.  

 

That's before we get into the way the Hebrew language is mangled by Pember in order to foist this deception on others.

[nebula]

But nothing you are asking about has anything to the claims made by either YEC or OEC.

OK, Shiloh - YEC interpretation.

When were the waters created?

When was eretz created?

If God does not create chaos, why was there chaos before Day 1 of creation?

 

There are all kinds of questions about things in the Bible that we have no clear definitive answers to.  Questions about God and where He came from and all kinds of things about biblical history that no one has ever been able figure out.  

 

Should we give up on the Bible because we have no answers to those questions???

Shiloh, if you are implying that turning away from the YEC interpetation of Creation is giving up on the Bible, we have a huge problem between us.

[Guest shiloh357]

OK, Shiloh - YEC interpretation.

When were the waters created?

When was eretz created?

If God does not create chaos, why was there chaos before Day 1 of creation?

 

Again, none of this has anything to do with what either YEC or OEC holds to.

 

You are asking questions that NO ONE including OEC has any definitive answers to.   Holding these things up as reasons to reject is YEC is rather hollow because OEC can't answer those kinds of questions, either. 

 

So I am at a loss as to why if YEC can't answers those questions, it serves as a valid reason to reject the YEC model, but the fact that OEC can't answer them either doesn't serve as a reason to reject the OEC model.  Do you see the internal inconsistency in your argument?

 

Shiloh, if you are implying that turning away from the YEC interpetation of Creation is giving up on the Bible, we have a huge problem between us.

 

No, I am simply showing the internal inconsistency of your argument.   You are claiming that the questions posed in the OP and the weakness of the YEC model to answer them served as your reason to reject that model.  

 

My point is that in the Bible leaves us with questions that are just as unanswerable, that God simply has not given us enough light to answer at all.   We don't give up on the Bible simply because the Bible doesn't provide us answers to certain questions about God, life, eternity, history, etc.   So why should unanswered questions serve as the basis for rejecting the YEC model.

 

Your OP is asking questions that neither YEC or OEC are equipped to answer, but you inconsistently reject only one of those models on the basis that it can't answer those questions.

[nebula]

So you think it offers the best answers?   Riddle me this, then.   Explain why God would completely destroy a pre-adamite human race for sin insetead of offering them a plan of redemption?

Like you said, do we have to know and understand all mysteries?

And how do you know there was not a redemptive plan given to them?

Imagine what would have happened in the days of Noah had there been no Noah.

 

On its very face, it contradicts the redemptive nature of God that He would judge a race of human beings and provide them no hope, no love, no future, no forgiveness, no plan of salvation, nothing.

See above.

 

Evidently you have not really thought this unbiblcial Gap Theory through very well.    The Gap Theory is an affront to the very nature of God.

Again, how do you know? How would you know how God did or did not reveal Himself to these people?

I find it amusing that you rebuke me for rejecting YEC over the mysteries of vs. 2, yet you reject someone else's interpretation of vs. 2 based on mysteries and assumptions to those mysteries.

Do you see how ironic this seems to me?

  

 

That's before we get into the way the Hebrew language is mangled by Pember in order to foist this deception on others.

Like I said, Shiloh if you have a better alternative to the questions I posed I am all ears.

Refuting someone else's answer is NOT and alternative.

[nebula]

 

OK, Shiloh - YEC interpretation.

When were the waters created?

When was eretz created?

If God does not create chaos, why was there chaos before Day 1 of creation?

Again, none of this has anything to do with what either YEC or OEC holds to.

 

You are asking questions that NO ONE including OEC has any definitive answers to.   Holding these things up as reasons to reject is YEC is rather hollow because OEC can't answer those kinds of questions, either. 

 

So I am at a loss as to why if YEC can't answers those questions, it serves as a valid reason to reject the YEC model, but the fact that OEC can't answer them either doesn't serve as a reason to reject the OEC model.  Do you see the internal inconsistency in your argument?

 

Yes, it does relate to YEC.

The fact that you are trying to negate the questions are evidence to this.

YEC acts like vs 2 never existed.

I ask again:

ACCORDING TO YEC, WHEN WERE THE WATERS CREATED?

 

 

Shiloh, if you are implying that turning away from the YEC interpetation of Creation is giving up on the Bible, we have a huge problem between us.

No, I am simply showing the internal inconsistency of your argument.   You are claiming that the questions posed in the OP and the weakness of the YEC model to answer them served as your reason to reject that model.

 

The waters, the deep, and eretz existing before God said, "Let there be light" serves as huge monkey wrench to the YEC model.

I have yet to hear a YEC make a reasonable explanation for what was going on in vs. 2.

 

My point is that in the Bible leaves us with questions that are just as unanswerable, that God simply has not given us enough light to answer at all.

Well, you are rejecting an intepretation based on mysteries and assumptions to mysteries.

 

We don't give up on the Bible

There you go again. I am NOT giving up on the Bible. Argh!

 

simply because the Bible doesn't provide us answers to certain questions about God, life, eternity, history, etc.   So why should unanswered questions serve as the basis for rejecting the YEC model.

 

Your OP is asking questions that neither YEC or OEC are equipped to answer, but you inconsistently reject only one of those models on the basis that it can't answer those questions.

Facepalm

[jerryR34]

formless and void, darkness, deep, the waters...all things ancient men were afraid of and from which they needed God to protect them.

[Guest shiloh357]

Like you said, do we have to know and understand all mysteries?

 

Wrong.  The redemptive nature of God isn't one of those things we don't have enough light on to understand.  We may not fully understand it all, but we have enough light to know how God thinks and acts.  He doesn't leave us in the dark about that.   So that is not a valid comparison.

 

And how do you know there was not a redemptive plan given to them?

 

Because the Gap Theory makes no room for it.  The theory states that God destroyed them with no plan of redemption no hope.   So on its face it contradicts biblical revelation about God's very nature.

 

 

Imagine what would have happened in the days of Noah had there been no Noah.

 

Do you think things simply got bad in the days of Noah??   God waited for Noah before He judged the earth.   God waited until there was a righteous man in order to provide a means of keeping the seed of man in the earth.   God never judged humanity with out the possibility of redemption.  It is why God has never wiped humanity off the earth.  He always provides a means for man to be redeemed.

 

Again, the Gap Theory contradicts what we know about God.

 

Again, how do you know? How would you know how God did or did not reveal Himself to these people?

 

You ask me these questions as if the Gap Theory is factual event in history and it isn't.  The Bible says nothing about it.  If it were true, why doesn't the Bible mention it?  As it stands there is not one shred of biblical corroboration for it.  Not a shred.   Why are you so quick to jump on board to advance a theory that is not only not corroborated by SCripture but actually sheds a reproach on the very character of God?

 

Are you so desperate to have answers to unanswerable questions that you are willing to support a theory that challenges God and brings a reproach upon Him???

 

I find it amusing that you rebuke me for rejecting YEC over the mysteries of vs. 2, yet you reject someone else's interpretation of vs. 2 based on mysteries and assumptions to those mysteries.

 

 

That is not true.   My comments about your rejection YEC point to an internal inconsistency in your logic.   You reject YEC because it is not equipped to answer the questions you listed in the OP but see no reason to reject OEC even though it is also not equipped to answer those questions.  I guess you are not really reading my responses too closely as you can't seem to frame them correctly.

 

I am rejecting the Gap Theory not on the basis of mysteries or assumptions to those mysteries; I am rejecting them on the grounds that it contradicts the Bible's claim that sin came into the world through Adam and because the Gap Theory brings reproach upon God.  

 

Like I said, Shiloh if you have a better alternative to the questions I posed I am all ears.

Refuting someone else's answer is NOT and alternative.

 

The alternative is to actually believe God's word on the matter.  Why is so hard to simply take God at His word?

[nebula]

Shiloh, do I need to pull up a list of logical fallicies and point out to you how many you are commiting in your argument?

 

 

Case in point:

 

The alternative is to actually believe God's word on the matter.  Why is so hard to simply take God at His word?

 

I take Gen. 1:2 at face value. Do you? How does it fit into the order of Creation?

 

 

 

Face it, vs. 2 is a challenge to YEC, and your only solution is to tear down another theory? Really?

 

The only thing I said about this "Gap Theory" is that the book presented the only solution to answering the questions.

 

And I never said anything about OEC.

 

Really, if you put the claims of OEC in front of me, I'd probably find pieces I'd throw away too.

 

 

I am truly sick and tired of you how you keep implying faith and redemption hanging on the balance of mindlessly accepting YEC. This type of defense lacks grace. In fact, it acts more like a cult manipulation than rightly dividing the word of truth.

 

 

The fact remains - vs. 2 presents things that do not fit the YEC model. So what do you do, pretend vs. 2 isn't there? Or do byou find a way to tackle the questions.

 

I dare a YEC to fit vs. 2 into the YEC model.

 

If you can't, then please stop trying to burn the questions.

[other one]

 

 

Pember is putting forth the tired old myth about the Gap Theory where there is a huge gap of millions upon millions of years between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2.   It can be demonstrated biblically to be false on every claim it makes.  

 

Well,so far, it offers the best answers.

 

I'm up for alternatives.

 

 

So you think it offers the best answers?   Riddle me this, then.   Explain why God would completely destroy a pre-adamite human race for sin insetead of offering them a plan of redemption?

 

On its very face, it contradicts the redemptive nature of God that He would judge a race of human beings and provide them no hope, no love, no future, no forgiveness, no plan of salvation, nothing.

 

Evidently you have not really thought this unbiblcial Gap Theory through very well.    The Gap Theory is an affront to the very nature of God.  

 

That's before we get into the way the Hebrew language is mangled by Pember in order to foist this deception on others.

 

I don't remember reading anything about a pre Adamite human race in the book.    Angels and things yes......  humans no.

 

I might add that Tomas Horn agrees with Pember and he's a published theologian who was a pastor at one of the largest churches in the nation for about 25 years, a practicing exorcist for about five of those years, has a doctor of divinity degree and is a published author with many years of research experience.

 

He also used to have a forum here on worthy, so I would think that George wouldn't think him a heretic anyway.