Creation and an Old Earth - One Possibility

[Ezra]

1 hour ago, hmbld said:

YEC is unsupported by scripture?  In the beginning God created all that there is in 7 days, including man, then recorded each generation down to Jesus birth, and you claim it is unsupported by scripture?  What is unsupported is all the stuff you have added into the 7 days, that is not supported by anything other than imagination!  You make a case of what "could be", which has no biblical support.  How could "in the beginning" not be the beginning?

Exactly. We can take the biblical account as factual (regardless of all the opposition) or we can succumb to theories and hypotheses which have no foundation.  Time and chance simply cannot create anything. Proof? Put all the ingredients of a recipe on your kitchen counter and wait for them to come together on their own to create a perfect dish. At the end of the year, they will still be sitting there.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

4 hours ago, hmbld said:

YEC is unsupported by scripture?  In the beginning God created all that there is in 7 days, including man, then recorded each generation down to Jesus birth, and you claim it is unsupported by scripture?  What is unsupported is all the stuff you have added into the 7 days, that is not supported by anything other than imagination!  You make a case of what "could be", which has no biblical support.  How could "in the beginning" not be the beginning?

I don't believe God's creation was in vain, waste and desolation.  If you believe God created waste and desolation, we have a different opinion of God's majestic creation.  We can agree to disagree on this point, since you have no proof, only an unsupported theory.  The Gap, which is no longer a theory, is supported by both New and Old Testaments.

[hmbld]

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

I don't believe God's creation was in vain, waste and desolation.  If you believe God created waste and desolation, we have a different opinion of God's majestic creation.  We can agree to disagree on this point, since you have no proof, only an unsupported theory.  The Gap, which is no longer a theory, is supported by both New and Old Testaments.

How do you get a "before the beginning" when reading Genesis 1:1-2?  It seems you have to add a whole lot to the story.  God only gave us some information, but I don't think we can just add what we think could be.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

4 minutes ago, hmbld said:

How do you get a "before the beginning" when reading Genesis 1:1-2?  It seems you have to add a whole lot to the story.  God only gave us some information, but I don't think we can just add what we think could be.

It's clear from the Old and New Testaments that angels sang and were present at the original creation.  Since it is also clear Satan had already fallen from his deception in the Garden of Eden, 1+1=2.  I refer you to Hazard and Other One's posts for the many, many scripture references.

Now a question for you as a YEC.  Where is Satan (Lucifer) creation mentioned in Genesis Chapter 1?  In other words, what day was he created?

[hmbld]

from got questions.org

Does it really matter whether we accept a “literal” interpretation of the Creation? The answer is “yes!” The gap theorists with their concept of the Luciferian flood believe that there was death before Adam, but the Bible declares unequivocally the opposite to be true. Romans 5:12 states that “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,” so to accept the concept of death before the time of Adam is to destroy the foundational message of the cross: “For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man [Jesus Christ] the many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:19). To advocate the concept of death before Adam sinned is diametrically opposed to Scripture’s explanation that death came after Adam sinned and became the necessity for man’s redemption.

Genesis records a catastrophe responsible for destroying everything that had the “breath of life” in them, except for those preserved in the ark. Christ refers to the global flood in Noah’s day in Matthew 24:37-39, and Peter writes that just as there was once a worldwide judgment of mankind by water, so there will be another worldwide judgment, this time by fire (2 Peter 3). The theory of Lucifer's flood is completely without scriptural evidence and must be rejected.

[JohnD]

1 hour ago, hmbld said:

from got questions.org

Does it really matter whether we accept a “literal” interpretation of the Creation? The answer is “yes!” The gap theorists with their concept of the Luciferian flood believe that there was death before Adam, but the Bible declares unequivocally the opposite to be true. Romans 5:12 states that “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,” so to accept the concept of death before the time of Adam is to destroy the foundational message of the cross: “For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man [Jesus Christ] the many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:19). To advocate the concept of death before Adam sinned is diametrically opposed to Scripture’s explanation that death came after Adam sinned and became the necessity for man’s redemption.

Genesis records a catastrophe responsible for destroying everything that had the “breath of life” in them, except for those preserved in the ark. Christ refers to the global flood in Noah’s day in Matthew 24:37-39, and Peter writes that just as there was once a worldwide judgment of mankind by water, so there will be another worldwide judgment, this time by fire (2 Peter 3). The theory of Lucifer's flood is completely without scriptural evidence and must be rejected.

I agree. And I oppose the Gap theory as trying to bridge atheism with theism.

And again, the spirit realm was created first. This is not to be confused with a pre-Adamic physical creation!

The spirit realm was in ruins if there were any ruins. And there was no death since spirit beings cannot die. For that matter, our spirits cannot die. So there was no death before Adam and the fall and there could not have been.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

12 hours ago, hmbld said:

from got questions.org

Does it really matter whether we accept a “literal” interpretation of the Creation? The answer is “yes!” The gap theorists with their concept of the Luciferian flood believe that there was death before Adam, but the Bible declares unequivocally the opposite to be true. Romans 5:12 states that “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,” so to accept the concept of death before the time of Adam is to destroy the foundational message of the cross: “For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man [Jesus Christ] the many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:19). To advocate the concept of death before Adam sinned is diametrically opposed to Scripture’s explanation that death came after Adam sinned and became the necessity for man’s redemption.

Genesis records a catastrophe responsible for destroying everything that had the “breath of life” in them, except for those preserved in the ark. Christ refers to the global flood in Noah’s day in Matthew 24:37-39, and Peter writes that just as there was once a worldwide judgment of mankind by water, so there will be another worldwide judgment, this time by fire (2 Peter 3). The theory of Lucifer's flood is completely without scriptural evidence and must be rejected.

I too believe in a literal interpretation of scripture which is why I belive The Gap is no longer a theory.  It is thoroughly supported by scripture, Old and New Testaments, and extra-Biblical sources like Enoch and Job who predate Moses.  Nothing you have written has made a dent in the Ruin-Reconstruction position.  Sin came into this world through Eve to the man Adam.  But sin already existed in the fallen angels.  And they tempted Adam through Eve to sin on earth.  This is what the Bible states.  What happened before God's restoration of earth from some prior judgment, we have information available to us to get a pretty good idea.  But a full understanding of it is unnecessary for someone to be a Christian.  Let's not make YEC a new commandment.

[hmbld]

You are claiming the entire creation account happened in the first verse of the bible, then, without explanation, it directly goes to a "Re-creation" event.

If everything is being re-created, then why is verse three creating light again?  Genesis 1:3  And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Exodus 20:11  For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.

So we have everything made in six days, and no gap mentioned, but rather each day had a day and a night, in sequence, and each created has no "re" in front of it.  

 

Mark 10:6  But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

 

No gap spoken of here.  But it does state "from the beginning".  As in not the second beginning, or a beginning after a gap, or a beginning after a judgement.  

 

And actually, does the bible state that the fallen angels have been cast out before, or during creation?  I could not find support of this, maybe I missed it, but I am wondering if it is possible the fall happened after the six days of creation.  

 

As for the "I don't believe God's creation was in vain, waste and desolation."

I agree.  Scripture states: "Now the earth was formless and empty,"

I read this as meaning creation was not finished.  The words you supplied indicate something that I have not found in scripture.  

 

Where you supply "replenish", my bible states "fill".  Genesis 1:28  “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it"

 

It seems when wording is played with, imagination can run wild.  

[Riverwalker]

Under what auspices or authority do we attempt to moderate the word of God to try and get it to change to fit the modern thinking of man in areas so vastly unproven as origin and evolution.

God said what He did, God said how He did it and God said when He did it.   and if the modern thinking of man disputes this, it is wrong.  Which was the original intent of the post. To offer one explanation to the modern thinking error that the universe is billions of years old.  But in the end we don't NEED an explanation.   What we NEED to do is accept God at His word and realize that no matter how much "sense" modern thinking makes (a highly debatable proposition BTW) it is in error.

God said, what, when, how He made creation.....and who are we to argue that?

[Ezra]

On 04/01/2016 at 7:17 PM, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Now a question for you as a YEC.  Where is Satan (Lucifer) creation mentioned in Genesis Chapter 1?  In other words, what day was he created?

While the creation of the angels is not mentioned in Genesis 1, Job 38:1-7 would suggest that the angels were also created on the first day of creation, and saw the foundations of the earth being laid. Since angels radiate light, it is entirely possible that when God said "Let there be light" the angels also came into existence along with the cosmic light (which was different from that of the sun).

Since angels are not eternal beings but created spirit beings, and all God's creative acts took place within those first six days, the angels must be fitted into that time frame.  One can only surmise that the omission of the creation of angels was deliberate, so that men would focus on the creation of the world and humanity.