Creation

[Believers Battlecry]

Looks like we win 13-5. Good night everyone!

[AMB]

What is amazing is that you have a book that clearly defines what we consider one whole day " morning, evening" and we totally reject that it could remotely be possibly, maybe be 24 hours like what we know now, but we will take a "man-made theory" of one million years, WOW that takes faith. I guess I will stick to the Book that has been around the longest. When you throw out the Genesis account of Creation you undermine the rest of the Bible. Like it or not!

Honestly, I've never understood why some believers use the interpretation of "day" in the creation account as a litmus test for fellow believers. It's like, if you don't believe in 6, 24 hour days then you must not believe any of the bible. This is absurd, and frankly graceless. There are numerous well-educated, believing scholars on both sides of this debate. So obviously, there is enough ambiguity to allow for some grace. Just because someone holds a different interpretation of "day" does not mean they disregard or "undermine" the totality of Scripture. Instead of using this as a reference for judgment, we should appreciate that we at least agree that all things were created by God, and God alone.

Believer's Battlecry, did you agree/disagree with this post or just ignore it? I was just curious because topics like these can tend to get ugly real fast if each side doesn't allow for some grace when it comes to interpretting the word "day".

I apologize I did not see it. To me the Bible is so clear that it was a literal 24 hours. It says Day/Evening. When have you ever heard someone use day and evening to talk about a week, year or 10 years. The Bible has such simple truths if only we will allow it. If Genesis 1:5 stated "And the evening and the morning were the first 1,000 years, do you think anyone in their right mind would deduce that maybe "1, 000 years" really meant one 24 hour day????? God help us! I stand on 2 Timothy 3:16 -All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: and Hebrews 4:12 -For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Mate...will Jesus literally have a sword coming out of His mouth...and will He literally look like a lamb?

That was funny . . . I appreciate that. lol

[Kabowd]

And for centuries Christians believed it was as clear as you could get that the world was flat because of phrases like "ends of the earth" and "four corners of the world". Then science revealed the world is a sphere and....oops.

Wrong. Isiaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

This tells us that the Earth is round, man discovered this fact 2,400 years later. Also, in a time when science believed the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world.

Oy vey. While you're doing your research on ID, it wouldn't be a bad idea to brush up on some history....and I don't mean Google.

The "flat earth" theory was widely held (and advocated) by believers, including Catholics and the Early Church fathers and even accepted by some of the reformers (such as Calvin and Luther). They held this belief because of SCRIPTURE. They rejected the Copernican Theory (I'm assuming you know what that is) even though Copernicus based his theory on Scripture also.

[AMB]

Must be nice to just copy and paste, and not have to actually engage in discussion and think for yourself.

Why do you believe that the earth is much older than 6,000 years old?

Science?

For one, we have record of civilizations dating much farther than 6,000 years. (Chinese for instance)

I would have to agree that it is much much older . . . I've recently had a conversation with a nuclear engineer that has studied much of the sciences around the age of the earth . . . but what he pointed out is that prior to the fall, Adam was never going to die, there was no death prior to the fall, even in the plant or animal kingdom, who are also eagerly waiting redemption. So really the bible never says how long Adam was in the garden, it could have been millions or billions of years. Yes it does say that he lived 930 years, and then died, but could it be possible that it was 930 years from the fall? Because prior to that there was no physical death, and our years really just count how long we lived before we died, the length between birth and death. In eternity, I don't think we will be keeping track of how many years we've been around. . . lol.

Another point of view is that we don't know when "the beginning" was, it could have been billions of years before the creation of the earth as indicated in Genesis occurs.

Along those same lines, we don't know how long he was in the garden without Eve. And we don't know how long they were together in the garden before the fall. They could have had children prior to the fall, many children at that. Her curse was that she would now have pain with childbirth . . . did that mean prior to the fall she had little or no pain in childbirth, or did she think I wonder what that means "pregnancy?"

When she does have Cane she said "With the LORD's help, I have produced a man!" Could this have been the first man she had after the fall? Prior to it she had minimal or no pain, now it was increased, which may have prompted her to say what she said, with her now acknowledging, in her fallen state, her need to depend and rely on God.

All very interesting . . . but I don't think we will know for sure. I would like to see what others think of these viewpoints.

Enjoy.

[cymba22]

Genisis chapter 2 (I think) tells you sun down to sun up was 1 day....now to me that is an exact referance therefore accurate as well is mentioning it in gen 1...so how can people chose which parts of the Bible to believe and which not?

Lord help. It says evening and morning. Evening and morning. It does not say sun up to sun down. What day was this first referenced? What day did God make the Sun to divide the day from the night?

Evening and morning means ending and beginning.

evening morning/sunup sundown same differance...I wasn't quoting from anything...at 1 am I was just going from memory....

[eric]

Hey AK. me old mate, I'm not on anybody's side. In fact you maybe right. you said,

Careful Ovedya, we're in the minority here.

Eric, if you run into the time, try to read "Christian Theodicy in light of Genesis and Modern Science" by William Dembski. It's a difficult read, but I respect your intelligence, so I'm not too worried. It really explains the position most "Crevolutionists" (term I made up) believe in.

Lol, AK, just as many people speculate on creation, as there are speculating on revelation. I was only pushing Ovedja's buttons. Okaynow, why should I read William Dembski's book. What does he know about our creator than I don't know. Has he spent any more time walking and talking with God than I have. I mean intimately. On a daily basis. You are a very intelligent man, my friend and I know you don't read any old rubbish like some do, but when you read these people's work, you are only reading someone else's viewpoints combined with a different style and approach to the subject. It's like trying to watch a ball play movement from several different angles of the field. Everyone sees it differently. And I agree, the earth could have been created a billion years ago. who knows........but it is an interesting topic, if anyone is into it...........beats the heck out of listening to Oprah or Dr Phil.

love ya bro.

[forrestkc]

Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site.

Likewise, I can point you to thousands of people who speak Hebrew who will tell you that Genesis 1 shouldn't be taken ultra literally.

Like the vast majority of Jews. One would think they would know.

[apothanein kerdos]

Who is the Intelligent Designer, if it is not the God of the Bible?

I mean no offense, but this reply reveals you're really not educated enough on this issue to be attempting to take a definitive stance for or against it. I'd highly encourage you to read/study some sources outside of AIG. For instance people like Phil Johnson, Bill Dembski or Michael Behe.

I agree, I don't know enough about ID, except it is better than evolution, but I believe in a literal Genesis interpretation, you believe in an Intelligent Designer.

You do too and you don't even realize it.

The problem I have with ID is that it does not clearly define who that IDer is. I believe the God of the Bible created the earth, ID does not name a designer.

You don't know anything about it, haven't studied it...and yet you're qualified to state your "problem" with it?

You are apparently the ID expert here, answer the question, does the ID theory clearly state who the IDer is? Why as a Christian would we want to disregard the true ID, aka God, in Genesis 1:1-11 but accept Him everywhere else?

She's not, I am though.

ID doesn't seek to name or describe the personality of the Designer because these require logical leaps away from the science that we have before us. What we can do is prove there Is a Designer, the Designer was Intelligent, and that this Designer was involved in his creation. A majority of ID scientists are Christians though, and have no problem admitting this.

Wrong. Isiaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

This tells us that the Earth is round, man discovered this fact 2,400 years later. Also, in a time when science believed the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world.

I'm just going to end this whole "flat earth" thing now. Christians never believed in a flat earth. In fact, no one after the Greeks would have seriously considered it.

However, Galileo showed that the world revolved around the sun, when the Church was adamant that the sun revolved around the Earth, and that the Bible taught this. It was obvious, in their minds, this was the truth. Science, however, shaped a better understanding of scripture.

The "flat earth" theory was widely held (and advocated) by believers, including Catholics and the Early Church fathers and even accepted by some of the reformers (such as Calvin and Luther). They held this belief because of SCRIPTURE. They rejected the Copernican Theory (I'm assuming you know what that is) even though Copernicus based his theory on Scripture also

This is a myth...the first part at least...they didn't believe in a flat earth. Those that did were generally uneducated. The entire purpose of Christopher Columbus sailing around the world was to get a faster trade to the East Indies. In his time they had to sail around southern Africa. He, along with many others, thought the world was smaller, thus, by sailing west, he'd get to the East Indies quicker. This is why Native Americans are called "Indians"...he thought he had found an undiscovered portion of the East Indies.

Lol, AK, just as many people speculate on creation, as there are speculating on revelation. I was only pushing Ovedja's buttons. Okaynow, why should I read William Dembski's book. What does he know about our creator than I don't know. Has he spent any more time walking and talking with God than I have. I mean intimately. On a daily basis. You are a very intelligent man, my friend and I know you don't read any old rubbish like some do, but when you read these people's work, you are only reading someone else's viewpoints combined with a different style and approach to the subject. It's like trying to watch a ball play movement from several different angles of the field. Everyone sees it differently. And I agree, the earth could have been created a billion years ago.

Well, it's not a book (yet). It's only a 50 page essay. Also, he's a very orthodox believer who believes the Bible is literal, reads it every day, etc. Thus, I would say his essay, even if disagreeable, is worth a look.

[apothanein kerdos]

Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site.

Likewise, I can point you to thousands of people who speak Hebrew who will tell you that Genesis 1 shouldn't be taken ultra literally.

Like the vast majority of Jews. One would think they would know.

Actually, and even though this might damage my argument, it's not reliable to use modern Jews. Most have adopted an allegorical approach to scripture, so you run into quite a bit of twisting and turning.

Ancient Hebrews are generally a safer bet.

[Emily~Anne]

What is amazing is that you have a book that clearly defines what we consider one whole day " morning, evening" and we totally reject that it could remotely be possibly, maybe be 24 hours like what we know now, but we will take a "man-made theory" of one million years, WOW that takes faith. I guess I will stick to the Book that has been around the longest. When you throw out the Genesis account of Creation you undermine the rest of the Bible. Like it or not!

Honestly, I've never understood why some believers use the interpretation of "day" in the creation account as a litmus test for fellow believers. It's like, if you don't believe in 6, 24 hour days then you must not believe any of the bible. This is absurd, and frankly graceless. There are numerous well-educated, believing scholars on both sides of this debate. So obviously, there is enough ambiguity to allow for some grace. Just because someone holds a different interpretation of "day" does not mean they disregard or "undermine" the totality of Scripture. Instead of using this as a reference for judgment, we should appreciate that we at least agree that all things were created by God, and God alone.

Believer's Battlecry, did you agree/disagree with this post or just ignore it? I was just curious because topics like these can tend to get ugly real fast if each side doesn't allow for some grace when it comes to interpretting the word "day".

I apologize I did not see it. To me the Bible is so clear that it was a literal 24 hours. It says Day/Evening. When have you ever heard someone use day and evening to talk about a week, year or 10 years. The Bible has such simple truths if only we will allow it. If Genesis 1:5 stated "And the evening and the morning were the first 1,000 years, do you think anyone in their right mind would deduce that maybe "1, 000 years" really meant one 24 hour day????? God help us! I stand on 2 Timothy 3:16 -All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: and Hebrews 4:12 -For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Mate...will Jesus literally have a sword coming out of His mouth...and will He literally look like a lamb?

You will find out on Judgment day. What a clown!

You've been a member here one day, and you have already begun to insult people here. Tsk, tsk. Your aim in this is. . . what? Is calling people clowns your idea of acceptable behavior?

Are you the Forum Police????

Let me define the question more clearly: Do you, as a professing christian, when in disagreement with another christian brother or sister, feel that it is acceptable to insult them?

I wonder if he has already read many of the threads here and found insults to be the acceptable norm here at Worthy?