Jump to content
IGNORED

Debate - Discussion


Dennis1209

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  35
  • Topic Count:  99
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  40,782
  • Content Per Day:  7.95
  • Reputation:   21,262
  • Days Won:  76
  • Joined:  03/13/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/27/1957

1 minute ago, Justin Adams said:

That is an entirely unnecessary thing to say.


I meant no offense... but those who believe in a gap must stand in that reality!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  35
  • Topic Count:  99
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  40,782
  • Content Per Day:  7.95
  • Reputation:   21,262
  • Days Won:  76
  • Joined:  03/13/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/27/1957

7 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Past tense. After it was created they did not ALL like the idea.

Furthermore, Job tells us that God did not trust His holy ones... even though they 'shouted for joy..' apparently they did not ALL enjoy it..

between Job and beginning was the blessed and sanctified of all God's work and then fall of lucifer and then job... God has perfect knowledge and trust is not necessary there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,602
  • Content Per Day:  4.02
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 minute ago, enoob57 said:


I meant no offense... but those who believe in a gap must stand in that reality!

 

OK. None taken. No harm no foul. The gap idea is divisive and the result of such a discussion is of doubtful merit.

In Genesis, we are told all we need to know without even a hint of modern scientific theory. Genesis, and for that matter most of scripture, is theological.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  447
  • Content Per Day:  0.28
  • Reputation:   80
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  10/26/2019
  • Status:  Offline

13 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Anyone interested in a serious Soapbox debate on the "Gap Theory"? That is that Genesis 1:1 through Genesis 1:2 are distinguished and separate from the six day creation week starting in Genesis 1:3. I ask that you know your Bible well and can provide scriptural support, have a basic understanding of different Hebrew words used and there precise meanings, for words like 'created' [L. Ex nihilo, H. bara ] and 'made' [H. asah]. I would represent the side that the earth and cosmos were already in existence sometime prior to Genesis 1:3, and existed prior to the beginning of the six day refashioning week. To avoid confusion and for clarity, I'd like to restrict this discussion to a maximum of myself and just TWO others.

If interested let me know, I'll PM George and request a Soapbox debate. I think a respectful debate at a minimum, will cause us to delve deeper into the Bible and interpret exactly what is being conveyed to us, and we may gain more clarity of what God's word actually says.

If the class isn't full. count me in.

Peace and joy

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  35
  • Topic Count:  99
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  40,782
  • Content Per Day:  7.95
  • Reputation:   21,262
  • Days Won:  76
  • Joined:  03/13/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/27/1957

4 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

OK. None taken. No harm no foul. The gap idea is divisive and the result of such a discussion is of doubtful merit.

In Genesis, we are told all we need to know without even a hint of modern scientific theory. Genesis, and for that matter most of scripture, is theological.

When born we were dead to Spiritual realties thus our limitation was to sensual aspect of a fallen world in this satan wiles takes most of humanity with him to perdition... science is embedded in those wiles and one must be s/Spiritually reborn to see through it :thumbsup: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  447
  • Content Per Day:  0.28
  • Reputation:   80
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  10/26/2019
  • Status:  Offline

2 hours ago, Jaydog1976 said:

For me the discussion on the gap theory would be a futile discussion. The reason being is that I believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture. When God says he created in 6 days and rested on the 7th I believe they are literal days. God does not use metaphors, word pictures or anything to give any reason why it would not be literal days. I find it interesting that many times Christian's try to find some spiritual meaning in something God says when in reality they should just read God's Word at face value. God is a literal God and when he does speak in word pictures and such there is no question that He is. 

I basically agree with you but we should always be ready to refute false accusations ab out God, holy, inspired and inerrant word.

love, peace and joy

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  17
  • Topic Count:  344
  • Topics Per Day:  0.13
  • Content Count:  7,393
  • Content Per Day:  2.70
  • Reputation:   5,320
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/27/2016
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, Jaydog1976 said:

For me the discussion on the gap theory would be a futile discussion. The reason being is that I believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture. When God says he created in 6 days and rested on the 7th I believe they are literal days. God does not use metaphors, word pictures or anything to give any reason why it would not be literal days. I find it interesting that many times Christian's try to find some spiritual meaning in something God says when in reality they should just read God's Word at face value. God is a literal God and when he does speak in word pictures and such there is no question that He is. 

Where does it say God created everything in six days? I also believe in the literal interpretation, literal is literal right? 

In retrospect, perhaps this proposed debate wasn’t such a good idea after all. It hasn’t even started and I see where it’s leading to. I had intended to show where the plain sense of scripture taken literally makes common sense and answers questions. Briefly, this was just a tidbit of what I had intended to debate and discuss.

Genesis 2:3 (KJV) And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

The Lord could have ended this verse with; which God created; or with God made. Instead He stated God created and made. Those two words are distinct and separate, and have two completely different meanings. The word create [L. Ex nihilo, H. bara] is always used as creating something out of nothing, spoken into existence. The word made [H. asah] is always used to describe something made and fashioned from something already in existence [material mold]. Any debate on the precise meanings of those two words?

With that in mind, reading the first chapter of Genesis [and many other places], makes the order of creation and the timeline much clearer. In the six day creation account, it becomes very clear what was then spoken into existence, and that that was made by God from already existing material previously spoken into existence. Where is it said the Earth was spoken into existence? It’s already presumed the earth was present at the start of the creation week, prior to Genesis 1:3.

Yeah, it's best I drop it...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  35
  • Topic Count:  99
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  40,782
  • Content Per Day:  7.95
  • Reputation:   21,262
  • Days Won:  76
  • Joined:  03/13/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/27/1957

20 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

Where does it say God created everything in six days? I also believe in the literal interpretation, literal is literal right? 

In retrospect, perhaps this proposed debate wasn’t such a good idea after all. It hasn’t even started and I see where it’s leading to. I had intended to show where the plain sense of scripture taken literally makes common sense and answers questions. Briefly, this was just a tidbit of what I had intended to debate and discuss.

Genesis 2:3 (KJV) And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

The Lord could have ended this verse with; which God created; or with God made. Instead He stated God created and made. Those two words are distinct and separate, and have two completely different meanings. The word create [L. Ex nihilo, H. bara] is always used as creating something out of nothing, spoken into existence. The word made [H. asah] is always used to describe something made and fashioned from something already in existence [material mold]. Any debate on the precise meanings of those two words?

With that in mind, reading the first chapter of Genesis [and many other places], makes the order of creation and the timeline much clearer. In the six day creation account, it becomes very clear what was then spoken into existence, and that that was made by God from already existing material previously spoken into existence. Where is it said the Earth was spoken into existence? It’s already presumed the earth was present at the start of the creation week, prior to Genesis 1:3.

Yeah, it's best I drop it...

 

Just to comment on your created / made comment … it is understood that God formed mans body from that which was created clay/dust >thus made< (just like we make sculptures) and then that which he formed or made blew into the Life of God's essence and that made or formed by God became a living soul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  44
  • Topic Count:  6,178
  • Topics Per Day:  0.88
  • Content Count:  43,784
  • Content Per Day:  6.23
  • Reputation:   11,227
  • Days Won:  58
  • Joined:  01/03/2005
  • Status:  Online

2 hours ago, enoob57 said:

Just to comment on your created / made comment … it is understood that God formed mans body from that which was created clay/dust >thus made< (just like we make sculptures) and then that which he formed or made blew into the Life of God's essence and that made or formed by God became a living soul.

To add to this, eve was made from the rib of adam. 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  499
  • Content Per Day:  0.19
  • Reputation:   277
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/06/2016
  • Status:  Offline

 

1 hour ago, ayin jade said:

To add to this, eve was made from the rib of adam. 

 

On the THIRD day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...