Creation and an Old Earth - One Possibility

[completedbeliever1]

On 11/2/2015 at 5:05 PM, Riverwalker said:

It always fascinates me when people try to put God in a box

Question....what bible scripture or rule says that everything God creates has to be brand spanking new?

Adam was created as a full grown man, mature in every way.   he was not made a baby.  If you were to look at him on day one, you might have though he was 25 or 30. because God made him that way

Eve was the same way, God did not create Eve and present her to Adam as a baby....but as a WOMAN  (Whoa Man!)

All of the animals were similarly created fully mature.....

So how big of a stretch is it to believe that God created the earth already old.....4 billion years old, with a history in place (including those pesky fossils), ready to support life, ready in all ways for Act 1 of His grand play?

Science teaches us that young planets cannot support life, that they are too violent , too devoid of life.  God would not plop us a new planet and expect us to live. No He would provide an environment that was run in and ready to support life..... So why would it take 4 billion years for God to do that, when He could just speak a 4 billion year old universe into being.

So in this scenario, Yes the universe is 4 billion years old, all of science would register that.... because that is the way God made it....6000 years ago.

 

Many things are given to us in life as a test....mostly about to determine our pride and humility. To me, this is a perfect test.  God says He made it in 6 days 6000 years ago by speaking it into being.....man says it exploded into existence and developed over 4 billion years.   Who are you going to believe.

This is really only a problem if you can't think outside the box you are trying to put God In.

But God....can do anything....even causing those  who are "professing to be wise, (to) become fools" Romans 1:22

 

We do put YAHVAH, (God) in a box most of the time.  But when it comes to the creation and how old the earth is, there is proof in the OT.
Everything is patterned after a 6 day work week, and the seventh day of rest.
Man and beast have 6 days to work, and rest on the seventh day.
The land has 6 years to work, and must rest the 7th year.
Just as the earth has 6000 years to work, and 1000 years to rest.
Counting back from 70 A.D. through all the ages we arrive at 3930 B.C.  If the earth has 6000 years to work, we just minus 3930 from 6000 and arrive at 2068 A.D.  This is 2000 years from the time of Titus and the destruction of Jerusalem.  

[Kan]

1 hour ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

IQ is just a worldly measure of intelligence.  I've really been in awe of some people I've conversed with on various Christian forums.  Christian knowledge far outweighs IQ.  Don't sell yourself short, and I won't get a big head that is undeserved as a Christian believer.

sure

[JohnD]

8 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Of course.  I can refer you to the university where I got my degree in Mechanical Engineering and the textbooks I used.  I can refer you to the reference books I used on process control and measurement as a Mechanical / Design Engineer with 40+ years of experience.  Nearly all of my experience has been on the technical side of engineering, including the use of lasers, electron microscopes, non-contact measurement techniques, process controls, etc.  One of my hobbies outside of work and staying current with both chemical and mechanical engineering fields, is astronomy and the building and using of telescopes.  I've been building telescopes since I was in grade school, a long, long, time ago.  I also program in multiple languages.  My IQ is 157, so I'm not the smartest person in the world, but I'm not a dummy either.  (Not counting my patents, my military classified work is now being used in the Middle East on the ground and in the air.  This was both electronics and optics work.)  This is work I can't and won't talk about.  I have moral, legal and ethical limits as to what I am allowed to talk about.

And this qualifies and entitles you to pass judgment on results that already took into account the limitations of the methods used?

Edited January 1, 2016 by Steve_S
Removed jab.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

From: Source

 

 

1. The fall of Satan would have created a major disruption in the pre-Adamic world: It is obvious that Satan fell before Adam. If Adam’s fall caused a cosmic disruption in terms of the second law of thermodynamics (increase of entropy or disorderliness), sin, death, diseases, and all kinds of imperfections in the present world, then the fall of Lucifer would cause a similar judgment on the world of Lucifer. If the Gap theory was not true, then Lucifer’s fall did not cause a cosmic disruption of the same scale as Adam’s fall. This proposition is impossible as Lucifer was created a more perfect being than Adam, and Lucifer was also given a kingship which is better than Adam. Lucifer had a throne according to (Isa 14:13); Lucifer was called a king (Job 42:34). While Adam was not called a king and Adam did not have a throne, the fall of Adam caused the entire earth (possibly including the heavens) to be cursed. Therefore, it is simply inconceivable to believe that at Lucifer’s fall, no significant judgment had fallen on the domain of Lucifer. Furthermore, when did Satan get created and fall? If we take the literal 6 days of creation and no re-creation according to the gap theory, then the Bible is silent about the creation date of Satan and the fall of Satan. This seems to be an impossible position. Satan is so fully described in so many places and so many types exist in the Bible. Lucifer was in the garden of Eden (Ezk 28:13-19) as an anointed cherub. However, in Gen 3 he appeared as a serpent. Are these two Gardens of Eden the same? Something must have happened between the sinless cherub and the sinful serpent. Ezk 28:13 says, "Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God..." past tense. This could mean the temptation with Eve, or it could mean Lucifer in Eden before he fell and became Satan. The latter is the more likely scenario, which would also lend credence to the gap theory. Then after that, verse 14 then calls him the anointed cherub: "Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth".... God speaking to him directly in the present tense. So he was an anointed cherub in the original Garden of Eden. Then after the rebellion of Lucifer, Lucifer was transformed (as a punishment) into Satan, the evil has already been “created” when the serpent appeared to Eve.     2. The Negative Aspects of Genesis 1:2 In the creation account, every word was positive, EXCEPT the words in Gen 1:2. Something must have happened between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2. 2.1 “Without from and void”: These words always refer to “emptiness”, “uselessness” or, “worthlessness”, that is to say, a confused, chaotic state, usually the result of some cataclysm, and often one that has been brought on by divine judgment: Void: Word study on “void” shows that the word “void” is always used in a negative sense. Usually, it is connected with something against God’s will. Nu 30:12-13,15; De 32:28; 1Ki 22:10; 2Ch 18:9; Ne 5:13; Job 15:4; Ps 89:33,39; 107:40; 119:126; Pr 7:7; 10:13; 11:12; 12:11; 15:21; 17:18; 24:30; Isa 55:11; Jer 4:23; 19:7; Eze 45:2; Na 2:10; Ac 24:16; Ro 1:28; 3:31; 4:14; 1Co 9:15; Tit 1:16 Word study on “without form and void” shows two appearances: Gen 1:2 and Jer 4:23. These two places are identical in description. Jeremiah 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. This passage is of particular interest because of its description of the divine judgment upon the land of Israel in the exact same terms used of the ruined earth in Genesis 1:2.  Jeremiah must, therefore, have understood the Genesis 1:2 description in this same way.  Therefore, Gen 1:2 should refer to a divine judgment. Furthermore, God says the original earth was created in a habitable form: Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else. The word for “create” in the verse above is the same verb used in Genesis 1:1 and the word most commonly employed in the Old Testament to describe the Lord’s miraculous, creative acts. According to this passage, God’s purpose in originally creating earth was for its useful habitation. 2.2. The Darkness: Gen 1:2 …and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Darkness is a symbolic of evil, and is always associated with evil or judgment of God.  The description of earth as lying under a shroud of darkness is meant to present a very negative picture – not one of blessing (which we should expect in the wonderful, original paradise of Genesis 1:1), but of cursing instead.  A survey of some of the uses of darkness in the Bible will make this point clear: a. Darkness as a symbol of evil: Ephesians 5:11, Ephesians 6:12, Colossians 1:13, 1st John 1:6, 1st John 2:11 b. Light as a symbol of good: John 1:4-5, 1st John 1:5, James 1:17, Revelation 21:23-24 c. Darkness and light contrasted: Matthew 6:23, John 3:19, Acts 26:18, Romans 13:12, Ephesians 5:8, 2nd Corinthians 6:14, 1st Peter 2:9, Thessalonians 5:4-5   d.  Darkness resulting from divine judgment:  Darkness is very real, inflicted in literal fashion as part of the judgment of God (cf. Is.5:30; 8:22; Ezek.32:7-8; Acts 13:11):  1.  The Supernatural Darkness upon Pharaoh’s Kingdom:  Darkness was one of the ten plagues upon Egypt which demonstrated God’s power over Pharaoh (Ex.10:21-29; cf. Ps.105:28. A similar divine blotting out of all light occurs at Exodus 14:20.  Here the cloud of God’s presence creates a supernatural darkness for the purpose of restraining the Egyptian army, yet at the same time it provides light to the Israelites (cf. Josh.24:7).  2.  The Supernatural Darkness at the Crucifixion:  Just as the Passover lamb, that poignant type of Jesus Christ dying for us, was commanded to be slaughtered “between the evenings [pl.]”, (i.e., at a time neither clearly day nor night: Ex.12:6; 29:39-41), so Christ’s death on behalf of all mankind was destined to be accompanied by an analogous, yet supernatural darkness.  The three synoptic gospel writers all record this darkness (lasting approximately three summertime hours: Matt.27:45-54; Mk.15:33-39; Lk.23:44-49), with Luke adding the important detail that “the sun was darkened”.  Immediately following this period of unprecedented darkness, the veil of the temple is split miraculously in two, and our Lord breathes His last – until His resurrection.  Thus the supernatural darkness of the cross is likewise a sign of divine judgment – our Lord Jesus Christ on our behalf submitting to the Father’s judgment upon all our sins and dying in our place.  He endured this terrible darkness and all that it entailed that we might forever live in the light with Him.  3.  The Supernatural Darkness at the Second Advent:  Prior to the return of our Lord (the second advent), earth will undergo the most terrible period of her history, the Great Tribulation (Dan.12:1; Matt.24:21 & 29; Mk.13:19 & 24; Rev.7:14).  But before the devil and his antichrist can accomplish their purposed annihilation of all believers, the “day of the LORD” will begin, a day of wonders and judgments that will shake the earth as never before (Joel 2:1ff.).  A period of supernatural darkness is prophesied as one of the final portents immediately preceding Christ’s return, a judgment from God upon antichrist and his kingdom (Is.13:9-13; 34:4; 60:1-2; Ezek.32:7-10; Joel 2:2, 2:10, 2:31; 3:15; Zeph.1:15-18; Zech.14:6-7; Matt.24:29; Mk.13:24-25; Acts 2:17-21; Rev.6:12-13; 16:10).  4.  The Supernatural Darkness of the Lake of Fire:  Hell will be a place of terrible and unbearable darkness.  This is despite the fact that hell is also described as a lake of burning sulfur and fire (Is.66:15-16 & 24; Dan.7:9-11; Matt.3:11-12; 5:22; 18:8-9; 25:41; Mk.9:43 & 48; Jas.3:6; Rev.19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).  Here is the “outer darkness” that will deprive its inhabitants – those who rejected Christ in life – of the very thing they so stubbornly rejected in life, i.e., “light” (Jn.3:19-21).  Just as the darkness of the Exodus plague (Ex.10:21) and the bowl judgment of Revelation (Rev.16:10-11) are tangible, this too will be a palpable, painful darkness (Matt.8:12; 22:13; 25:30).  Even now, this particular type of supernatural darkness and fire exists in the interim hell (for unbelieving humans: Lk.16:24; 2Pet.2:17; Jude 13 and for certain of the fallen angels:  2Pet.2:4; Jude 6), although the ultimate “lake of fire” has yet to receive its first inhabitants (Rev.19:20; 20:10). Therefore, from everything we know about the use and meaning of darkness elsewhere in the Bible, to describe the universe as dark and without light (as Genesis 1:2 does) is to describe a status quo of cursing, rather than blessing, and of divine judgment, rather than original, miraculous creation.     2.3. The Problem of The Deep: Is the deep on earth? In Gen 1:2, the earth was “without form,” is it possible that the deep was on earth? It seems unlikely. However, the deep is mentioned many times in the Bible as if it is on earth. Note that in Gen 7:11 it is the fountains of the great deep that were broken up. There exist many proofs for that the breaking up of these fountains, which in turn caused the formation of the major mountain ranges on land and in the deep oceans on earth, see the book by Faid, Scientific Proofs for Biblical Mysteries, (exact name to be confirmed, but I do have the book). Perhaps there is a difference between the deep and the fountains of the deep. The deep mentioned in Job 41:31 seems to be out of this world, just as the sea mentioned in the same verse. It is clearly stated in the Bible that the deep/great deep is out of this world, while the fountains of the deep are on earth. Sometimes, the fountains of the deeps are used to typify or represent the deep. This is similar to the use of the term “the sea;” the earthly seas are the types or small-scale replica (or almost replica) of the actual sea in the universe. The above discussion is related to the gap theory because of the two “floods.” The first “flood” involved the deep as recorded in Gen 1:2 and 2 Pet 3:5-7, the second flood is the real flood involved only the fountains of the deep (it also involved the windows of heaven).  Again this shows the difference between the two “floods.” The first “flood” was never described as a flood in the Bible, by the way. Note again Genesis 8:2, "...the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the WINDOWS OF HEAVEN were opened." - possibly the third heaven. This great deep or deep is that sea, that frozen glass, which is part of the third heaven leading to the throne of God, which Satan the serpent travels up and down in. "Now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face." This is "the sea of glass" that John saw in Revelation 4:6...."And before this throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal..." However, this identification of windows of heaven to some bodies of water in the third heaven is not 100% sure. From Gen 1:9, the water canopy theory seems to be supported. Based on the water canopy theory, the windows of heaven will refer to the bodies of water above the atmosphere of the earth before the flood. 2.4. The Problem of Seas: In biblical symbolism, the sea is usually not a positive sign.  On the contrary, the sea is often associated with evil.  In keeping with usage employed elsewhere in the Bible, any description of the earth’s surface as lying under the face of the deep conveys a very negative picture – not one of blessing, but one of cursing.  This can be readily seen from a survey of these symbolic uses of “sea” in the Bible: a.  The Sea as a Sign of Divine Judgment:  Hell is divided into two compartments: 1) Abraham’s Bosom, the place of deceased believers prior to Christ’s ascension (Lk.16:19-31);   2) “hell” the place of the deceased unsaved to this day (Matt.5:29-30; 23:33; Lk.12:5; 16:23; Rev.20:13-15); “The Deep,” on the other hand, often refers to a place where certain of the fallen angels are presently incarcerated (Lk.8:31; 2Pet.2:4; Jude 6; Rev.9:1-11; 20:1-3). This equating of the sea with the nether-world buried beneath it helps to explain the difficult passage in Revelation where we are told that at the final judgment, “the sea will give up her dead” (Rev.20:13). That the sea often corresponds to hell in the Bible is another indication that its appearance on the scene in Genesis 1:2 in this world encompassing form should not be taken as a neutral signal.  An imperfect world, a world in the grips of divine judgment, a world that needs a hell, has a sea. b.  The Sea as an Instrument of Divine Judgment:  Besides being a sign that divine judgment has occurred, the sea is sometimes an instrument of that very judgment.  Cases of this type of divine judgment are relatively rare in scripture and always highly significant events.  In addition to the Genesis judgment we are now considering, two other large scale “water judgments” stand out:    1. The Antediluvian Civilization (Gen. 6-9; cf. 2Pet.2:5; 3:5-7):  God “spared not” that old world but “brought the flood upon the world of the ungodly” (2Pet.2:5).  Water was the means of annihilating the pre-noahic civilization, completely extirpating the sinful world of that time in one of God’s most spectacular water-judgments.  His promise to Noah afterwards, sealed with the rainbow, has guaranteed for us that the flood and the Genesis Gap judgment will be the only two universal water judgments on the present earth (Gen.9:8-17).  2. The Egyptians in the Red Sea (Ex.14-15):  The fact that there will be no more world-wide water judgments in the manner of the flood has not ruled out water as a more local instrument of divine judgment (cf. Tyre: Ezek.26:19-21).  The most spectacular of these is the destruction of Pharaoh and his army in their pursuit of the Israelites through the Red Sea.  God actually parted this massive body of water (see the Exodus 14 series) to demonstrate His power and majesty in a complete and devastating judgment upon Pharaoh and his followers (Ex.14:18; 15:1-18). c.  The Sea as a Medium for Evil:  Although scripture recognizes and allows for the economic necessities of life, arrogant and idolatrous super-commerce, both past and prophetic, has a special relationship to the sea on which it depends.  Both Tyre (Is.23:1-18; Ezek.26-28), and the antichrist’s Babylon (Rev.18:11ff) maintain a worldwide arrogance of commerce (associated with idolatry, and symbolized by prostitution), which negatively affects their partners, and it is the sea that acts as the link between them.  Significantly, it will be remembered from Part 1 of this study, it is the Prince of Tyre whose “trafficking” is used symbolically for Satan’s activities in seducing many of his fellow angels to join his cause (Ezek.28:12-19). d.  The Sea as the Point of Origin for the Antichrist:  The sea is the place from whence the Beast, or antichrist, rises (Rev.13:1).  As the point of origin for the one who most completely opposes Christ while operating most closely with Satan (2Thes.2:9), the sea is more nearly to be connected with cursing than with blessing.  The symbol of “coming up from the sea” first occurs in Daniel 7:3, where all four of the major anti-God empires of history arise from that source, the last being Rome, in both its historic and prophetic incarnations; the title of “beast” is then transferred from the kingdom to its ruler in Revelation 13:1, making the sea the origin not only of the most anti-God empire in history but also of its anti-Christ emperor (cf. Dan.7:3-14; 9:25-27; 11:21-45; 2Thes.2:1-12; Rev.13:1-18; 17:1-18). e. The Sea as the Home of Symbolic Monsters Representing Satan:  Besides being the symbolic point of origin for antichrist, the devil’s chief minion, Satan himself shares in this close connection with the sea through his identification with the two satanic monsters of the deep, Leviathan (cf. also Job 3:8, 41:1-34; Ps.74:12-14) and Rahab (Job 9:13, 26:12-13; Ps.87:4; 89:9-10; Is. 27:1; 30:7, 51:9-10).  Biblical writers made use of the names of these legendary creatures to represent Satan symbolically (in his capacity as the dragon-serpent: see Amos 9:3. and Isaiah 27:1. Often, these monsters are also used to represent empires inspired by Satan (compare the beasts of Dan.7), as in the case of the following passage where the satanic Egypt of the Exodus is called Rahab (Isaiah 51:9-10) f.  The Removal of the Sea:  The lack of any sea in the eternal state has puzzled many readers of Revelation 21:1, but should come as no surprise in light of our discussion above.  When evil has finally been banished forever and we inhabit at last the new heavens and new earth “where righteousness dwells” (2Pet.3:13), there will no longer be any need for a sea, either as a means of judgment or as a memorial to judgment past.  This clear truth is all the more reason to regard the sea in Genesis 1:2 as a result of (and memorial to) God’s initial judgment on Satan’s rebellious activities, and not as a part of His original creation of the earth. g.  The Devils and Water:  Lastly, devils seem to like to dwell in waters (Matt 8:32, 12:43). Satan was described as a marine animal in Job 40:23, 41:31,27:1, Rev 13:1... This may have something to do with the judgment of God in Gen 1:2 via waters. 3. Textual Considerations in Genesis 1 a.  The presence of the heavens and earth in place at Genesis 1:3 shows this is re-creation:  As God begins to work on the earth in Genesis 1:3, earth (and the heavens in which it exists) is already in place (an impossibility unless this is a re-creation). b.  The presence of the angels during the seven days shows this is re-creation:  The angels are present too (also necessarily having been created at some earlier time – before the Genesis Gap – an impossibility unless this is re-creation), “shouting for joy” at the reconstruction of the earth (Job 38:4-7).  “Sons of God” (Gen 6:2, Job 1:6, 2:2, 38:7) clearly refers to the angels. Now, Job 38:7 says that when God was creating the universe, angels were there already. Thus God must have created these angels before the creation of the earth in Gen 1:2. c.  God’s pronouncement of His acts as “good” shows this is re-creation:  God, being God, creates only what is good in the first place.  Bringing light out of darkness, dry land out of only sea, life out of lifelessness, are all acts of bringing something good out of something “not good” (i.e., darkness, sea, lifelessness).  The pronouncement “and God saw that it was good” is a stamp of divine approval on the restoration of what had been originally good and now was restored to its “good” condition following an interval of judgment upon evil (Gen.1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). d. Re-creation is focused on Man as a replacement for Satan and his angels:  Finally, all of God’s work throughout the seven days is focused on Man: • Day 1: Light out of darkness, necessary to sustain life. • Day 2: Atmosphere, also necessary for all life. • Day 3:  Dry land, essential for any animal life, and for Man; vegetation as a source of food, materials, pleasure, etc. • Day 4:  Lights to “serve as signs”: for the ordering of human life in necessary increments of time. • Day 5: Other creatures: enriching human life. • Day 6: Land animals and livestock to support and bless human life; finally, Man. • Day 7: God’s Sabbath rest. The creation of Man, along with an environment to support our lives in these physical bodies, is clearly the purpose and goal of the seven days of God’s restorative work in the world.  Only after the earth has been restored to viable conditions, Man created upon it and placed in charge of it, does God conclude that all He has made is “very good.” Even the pattern of the seven days is one that suits and reflects the subsequent history of mankind, with each day standing for one millennium of human history and with the seventh day signifying the millennial rule of Christ.  The fact that God’s restorative work during the seven days is entirely focused on Man also argues for Genesis 1:2 beginning a process of re-creation, for Man, specifically through the God-Man, Jesus Christ, is meant in no small part as a replacement for Satan and his fallen angels. e. Capitalization in Genesis 1 shows this is re-creation:  The entity “heaven” was created in Genesis 1:1, but it was capitalized in Genesis 1: 8. Earth was created in Genesis 1:2, but was capitalized in Genesis 1:10. The entity “day” was created when Lucifer was created (Eze 28:15) Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee). But the word “day” was capitalized in Genesis 1:5. Similarly, night might have been created earlier (if day was created earlier, so should night), it was capitalized in Genesis 1:5. Therefore, the capitalization in Genesis chapter 1 signifies the re-creation, not the creation. If not, why don’t the capitalizations occur at the description of the original creation? f. The word “replenish” in Genesis 1:28 shows this is re-creation: g. The Law of First Mention shows this is re-creation: The word “void” first occurs in Genesis 1:2. If the law of first mention is true and if the gap theory is wrong, then we get the impossible conclusion that “void” is “good.” The same statement can be applied to “darkness,” and “without form.” The deep has two meanings; therefore, we have to be careful in applying this argument to the term “the deep.” 4. Genesis 2:4 as a Summary Genesis 2:4 has traditionally been at the root of much of the confusion about the Genesis Gap and the legitimate distinction drawn by scripture between the original creation of Genesis 1:1 and the seven days of re-creation. 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, (Ge 2:4) The vocabulary used in Genesis 2:4 to summarize creation and re-creation is both consistent and precise:  we are told of the “creation” of heaven and earth, and the Lord God’s “fashioning” of them. The clue to why Moses, the writer of the Pentateuch, felt the need to employ both verbs here is to be found in the word “generations.”  This plural is normally used in the Old Testament to detail the ancestry or lineage of human families, and therefore necessarily includes the idea of development over a significant amount of time.  Here, therefore, “generations” is clearly being used by way of analogy to sum up the “developments”, that is, the different periods of history for the heavens and the earth, namely: 1) original creation; 2) judgment and Genesis Gap; 3) re-creation.  So while it is clearly difficult to reconcile this verse with a seven-day original creation theory, by combining the verb of creation ( – Genesis 1:1: most suited for original creation), with the verb of manufacture (– found throughout the seven days, e.g., Gen.1:7, 16, 25: more suited to reconstitution), and by setting both verbs in a context of lengthy, “generational” development, Genesis 2:4 makes perfect sense as a summing up of all that has gone before: the original creation of Genesis 1:1, the Genesis Gap, and the seven days of re-creation. The similar summary statements in Genesis form a pattern: Ge 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:32; 11:10,27; 25:12-13,19; 36:1,9; 37:2 Compare: “These are the generations of …” and  “This is the book of the generations of …” Gen 1:1,” God created the heaven and the earth.” Notice the singular “heaven.” Now in Gen 2:1,4, the Bible says “heavens.” Thus, there are some other heavens being created in subsequent verses following Gen 1:1. Now, in Rev 21:1, the Bible says: “the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.” It seems that the Bible tries to convey the idea that the creation in Gen 1:2-31 was a “re-creation” as there is only a first heaven and first earth, no second heaven and second earth except the new heaven and the new earth. All the new versions say “heavens” in Gen 1:1. Is there a conspiracy? I do not know. The KJB says in Gen 1:1  “heaven.”  I would guess that Satan, in an effort to destroy the gap theory, change “heaven” into “heavens” to give readers the impression that Gen 1:1 is a summary statement of the creation account in Gen 1:2-31. Now, is it true that Gen 1:1 is a summary statement of the creation? I say no. The summary is obviously given in Gen 2:1 and 4, the language clearly shows this. Now, if Gen 1:1 is not the summary statement, but rather a beginning statement, then, the gap theory is possible. If Gen 1:1 is the summary, then Gen 1:2 is the beginning statement of the detailed creation account. I say the second hypothesis is highly unlikely. Why did God start with negative statements in Gen 1:2 as the beginning of the creation account? Also, if the second hypothesis is true, then the earth was created before the heavens, which is highly unlikely, in light of Gen 1:1, 2:1,4. The conjunction “And” in Gen 1:2 also implies that the statement of Gen 1:2 is a continuation of Gen 1:1. Thus, Gen 1:1 is not the summary statement of the creation account. The most natural theory is that the Gen 1 narrative is a history told in a chronological order. God created the first heaven and the first earth. Then God judged the first heaven and the first earth in Gen 1:2. Gen 1:3-31 is a re-making of the first heaven and the first earth. Now, there exist several other explanations of Gen 1:2. One of them is the thesis that Gen 1:2 is neither the beginning statement of the creation account nor the description of a judgment; but a statement about how God made the earth. Now, this view will undermine God’s glory. God made the whole universe simply by His word (2 Pet 3:5-7), why did He need to do the extra work to create earth? The only creation He may need to do the extra work is the creation of man. Is our God incapable of creating the earth with a form and not void? Is our God incapable of creating the earth without the deep and having the Holy Spirit to move upon the face of waters? To this theory, we should say NO! In all the scripture accounts of creation (of any kind of anything...) this Gen 1:2 stands as the most singular description with negative adjectives (without form and void) and most amount of works by God and most peculiar description of the works. Under this interpretation Gen 1:2 represents the single most damaging account of God’s work, God’s name is severely damaged. This is probably the reason why Satan tries to destroy the gap theory by adding an “s” to the word “heaven” in Gen 1:1 so that God’s name will be damaged. Therefore, Gen 1:2 is not a creation account, but a judgment account, then praise the Lord! God is majestic in all His works. In Gen Chapter 1 we see the work of creation (Gen 1:1), the work of judgment (Gen 1:2) and the work of redemption (Gen 1:3-31). This should be the proper way to interpret the chapter! 5. Three Worlds according to Peter           "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: Whereby the world that THEN WAS, being overflowed with water perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are NOW, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." (II Peter 3:5-7 KJV)   Observations: 1. Peter is contrasting three worlds: The world then, the world now, and the new world. 2. The old world was judged by water, the present world will be judged by fire. 3. The present world will be completely 7destroyed (perished) by fire 2 Pet 3:10: …. in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.   So should the old world, completely destroyed by means of water. 4. In Noah’s flood, the marine animals and plants were not destroyed. The heavens were not destroyed. In the judgment of the present world, both the heavens and earth will be destroyed. Therefore, 2 Peter 3 does not describe the Noah’s flood, but the Genesis 1:2 flood. 5. The creation in Genesis 1 was described as renewal : Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are CREATED: and  thou RENEWEST the face of the earth. (Psalm 104:24-30 KJV) 6. Genesis 9:11 shows that Noah’s flood is different from the flood of Genesis 1:2: And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. (Gen 9:11) The last two clauses of that verse are separated by a semicolon and the clause conjunction neither, signifying that not either of the two cases mentioned will ever apply again.  No more floods.  There were two floods mentioned there: one of which destroyed the earth, the other of which cut off all flesh from the face of the earth.   The differences between the flood (Gen 7 & 8) and the waters on 2 Pet 3:5-7  In 2 Pet 3: water (singular) is used;  In Gen 7 & 8: waters (plural) is used.  In 2 Pet: simply water is used;  In Gen 7 & 8: most of the time: the waters of the flood used, or simply waters.  In 2 Pet: the “world” was used;  In Gen 7 & 8: It uses only “earth.”  In 2 Pet: heavens and earth was used in conjunction;  In Gen 7 & 8: only the earth is used (or the center of attention). In 2 Pet: the earth standing out of water and in the water;  In Gen 7 & 8: the above description never appears.  In 2 Pet: the world was overflowed with water;  In Gen 7 & 8: the earth was overflowed with water.  In 2 Pet: the world perished;  In Gen 7 & 8: Only all flesh on the dry land having nostrils died (Gen 7: 21-22). Notice that no marine lives were mentioned in the flood of Noah. Supposedly some or most of the marine lives survived the flood, so did the seeds of the plants and vegetables. Therefore the 2 Peter 3 description could not possibly be Noah's flood. Noah's flood is never described as the earth standing out of and in the water. It was completely submerged. So the water of 2 Peter 3 have something to do with the waters of the deep the "waters" of Genesis 1:2.   6. The Problem of Sin and Death before Adam When Adam and Eve transgressed, SIN (and consequently death) *ENTERED* into the world, into that re-created world:      "Wherefore, as by one man sin ENTERED into the world, and DEATH by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:" (Rom.5:12 KJV) Common sense dictates that old "serpent" who did the tempting was already hanging around, was already evil, and, therefore, sin (and death) already existed.... somewhere.  But when God re-created the earth, Satan and his angels were excluded from physically influencing it until Adam sinned.  Obviously, he (Satan, Lucifer, the dragon) had brought the previous earth age into total physical and spiritual chaos (that is why God re-created it).   Question: This passage contradicts the Gap Theory as sin and death did not exist before Adam. Answer: The statement is obviously wrong. Sin did exist before Adam!!! Otherwise, there would be no Satan to tempt Eve and Adam! The key here is that sin and death entered THIS world by Adam. The passage says NOTHING about whether there was sin or death in the previous world. Remember the three worlds by Peter!!! 7. How about the Problem of Six-Day Creation in Exodus 20:11? For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Ex 20:11) The answer is simple. The Bible uses the word “made.” It does not use the word “created.” Had the Bible use the word “created,” then the Gap Theory would be dead. 8. Finally, the Gap theory can be traced back 2700 years to the Jewish Rabbis See the reference 5. References: (not including the Ruckman sources) 1. A good thesis by Dr. Robert Luginbill: http://www.ichthys.com/sr2-copy.htm 2. The booklet by Brother Gaines Johnson, “The Gap Theory”:  see also http://www.kjvbible.org/ 3. The Gap Theory Ring: http://www.ringsurf.com/netring?ring=Gap_Theory;action=list 4. The book by Jeffrey A Tibbetts, “Genesis 1:1-3: A Commentary on the First Three Verses in the Bible.” 5. The history of Gap Theory: http://www.dcnet2000.com/~drpatrick/page129.html

[SavedOnebyGrace]

11 minutes ago, JohnD said:

And this qualifies and entitles you to pass judgment on results that already took into account the limitations of the methods used?

Wow, one wiser than Solomon is here.

Yet you feel you are perfectly qualified to judge me.

[JohnD]

9 hours ago, JohnD said:

On 12/28/2015 at 6:47 PM, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

My first perception of the Holy Spirit or an angel from God was when I drowned.  I can't swim but my fiancee in 1971 encouraged me to wade in Big River in a Missouri state park.  While she was swimming, some people in a canoe came rowing down the river.   A wave hit the shore and swept me out to the middle of the river.  I fought to get my head above water but only briefly could.   After the second lungful of river water, I stopped struggling and settled to the bottom of the river, roughly 10 to 12 foot deep.  I can only speculate.  I know that breathing in river water hurt.  I found out later that my fiancee was hung-up on a dead tree somewhere upstream of me, struggling to break free also.  As I laid in the bottom of Big River, spread-eagle, a peace came over me as I accepted my inevitable death.  While I waited, a peace beyond description came over me.  Then, my arms and legs started to move in a crawling fashion, like a baby would, under a power not my own.  I marveled at what was happening.  I took in another lungful of river water, my third or fourth, I had lost count.  I inwardly marveled at what was happening even though I still expected to die.  After crawling about 20 feet or so, my head broke the surface of the river.  I laid on the sandy shore and coughed up river water for some period of time.  After some indeterminate period of time, my fiancee showed up saying she was caught in a tree.  She could see I was in trouble but couldn't free herself from it to help me.  I tried to explain to her what happened.  That God or an angel had saved me after I gave up and she just hit me.  She couldn't deal with what I told her.  The funny part about this is that I saved her from suicide some time later.  She spent about three weeks in the psychiatric ward at Barnes Hospital in St. Louis.  We broke up some time after her release.  She didn't understand what I went through so I kept in all to myself.

I had drowning nightmares for years.  After the breakup, my college grades plummeted.  The stress was unbearable without alcohol.  I tried to make sense of why God saved me but couldn't.  The answer was not in my Douay-Rheims Bible.  I started investigation other religions but found them all wanting.  So God took a backseat in my life.  I was basically an agnostic.

Fast forward 10 years.  I got married to another woman in another state who was a lapse Southern Baptist who had been married twice before.  A good portion of my family boycotted our wedding because she was not Roman Catholic.  During our first year of marriage, she started attending a "full Gospel" church.  I did not go to any church.  We were on a long weekend holiday with her sister and her husband at Silver Dollar City.  Everybody but me decided to go into a shop with a strong odor of potpourri.  So instead, I stepped in the shop next door that I thought was a leather shop.  It was, but it was also a shop that sold black powder guns.  (I had no interest in guns at that time.) 

So from a distance of about 20 feet, I heard a customer ask the man behind the counter about the beautiful woodworking on a rifle he was holding.  It was the first rifle he had ever built.  So the customer asked, how did he (the man behind the counter) get there.  He then gave his testimony and I was physically frozen in place, and my ears started to burn.  The man had been a biker with an outlaw biker gang.  He had done so much illegal drugs that his body was breaking down.  He was in an ER ready to die.  As his heart stopped, he was immediately in Hell.  God spoke to him saying repent and live, and he said no and was shocked back to life.  He died again and God spoke to him to repent and live.  He said no but was shocked back to life.  After the third time he was shocked back to life, the ER doctor and nurses told him to do what the voice said.  You see, they heard the voice too.  He then repented and his life was spared.  From the on, he did whatever God led him to do.  He became somewhat of a local celebrity and was invited to speak at some denominational churches.  They didn't always like what he said because he never strayed from God's word.

I knew when I heard him that he had heard from God.  He and I never spoke.  As I left the shop, I asked my wife if my ears looked burnt.  She said they looked okay.  Eventually, I secretly read her Dake KJV Study Bible and decided to go to church with her.  I was soon baptized in that church, fully submerged.  My feet went out from under me but I was not nervous.  I was at peace.  God brought me home.

I trust God for all the revelation He has given me, and all the correction He has given me over the years.  The Gap Principle has been with me from the start to reconcile my scientific nature and the Bible.  God has recently shown me the error in my Calvinistic theology.  If I'm wrong about anything else, I trust God will correct me, in Jesus name.

 

I was going to leave this alone.

I see a lot of expression here with no answer to the question... reasons why you trust your gut and believe it to be God, or his Spirit...

"The Gap Principle has been with me from the start to reconcile my scientific nature and the Bible."

I would suggest you get in contact with the scientists at I.C.R. (the Institute for Creation Research) and you'll discover how much of what you think is your scientific nature is the by product of many years of atheistic evolution programming under the guise of a balanced education.

I was looking in your response for biblical verification / validation of what you perceive of as true and / or coming from the Holy Spirit... and I see none. While I am glad you are coming around from the diametrical opposition to the truth of the Bible I see you still trying to make the Bible fit what you consider the higher authority (your programming and your intelligence).

What was the point about giving Solomon all that wisdom?

Where he ended up. He led Israel into idolatry and God would have split the kingdom in his lifetime were it not for his father David... 

The truth is what we must submit to. We cannot make it fit our agenda no matter how impressive our / your experience and brilliance may be.

[JohnD]

19 minutes ago, JohnD said:

6 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Yet you feel you are perfectly qualified to judge me.

 

I am judging only your response.

[JohnD]

In response to the Gap theory.

1. Lucifer's fall was in the spirit realm.

2. We have very little to go on about the spirit realm.

3. Adam's fall fell the entire human race, Lucifer's fall only 1/3 who chose to follow him.

The source you quote (Dr. Kevin) has holes in his opening premises that a high school drop out can expose.

 

[JohnD]

Can a God capable of creating anything out of nothing, who can create an entire spirit realm (size unknown), who can create an entire universe (size beginning to become known), create all things fully functional from the start?

[JohnD]

Adam on day one was obviously one day old.

He was fully functional. An adult. He would give

the appearance to scientists to have been at least 18

years old or older...

But he was one day old.