Did God create the universe in 6-24 hr days? Or do some scientist who say Billlions upon Billions of years pull weight? Why do you believe what you believe?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
In the Beginning....
- Thread starter Jedi Knight
- Start date
- Status
I believe it was six 24 hour days, because that is what it says. God knows the difference between days and ages, if he took billions of years to create the universe, he could have easily said so.
God did not need six days to create everything, he could have done it in an instant.
And time is not the only problem between evolution and creation.
The Bible says God created the Earth before the Sun, Moon, or stars.
The Bible says there was light before the Sun was created.
The Bible says plant life was created before the insects. If each day were a long age, how did the plants reproduce?
The Bible says birds were created before insects. What did the birds eat if it was ages?
The Bible says God created plant life before the Sun was created. How did the plants survive if it was ages?
The first animal mentioned in the Bible is "great whales" the largest of all animals, evolution says life began with one celled animals, the smallest.
For each day, the Bible says there was an evening and a morning. If each day was a long age, then each evening and morning would be a long age as well. Again, how could plant life survive in darkness for ages? One side of the Earth would have become extremely cold while the other became extremely hot. There are multiple problems here, no tides, the oceans and seas on one side would evaporate, the other side freeze...
So, time is not the only problem. There is no way to reconcile the creation account with the theory of evolution.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree.:jesus: But you forgot to check your answer"yes".:tongue3:
Last edited by a moderator:
What is a morning and evening in the days there was no sun?
Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
Gen 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
God created light on the first day. There was light on the Earth, but it was not coming from the Sun which was created on the fourth day.
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Robert Snow
New Member
That is your right; as is those who disagree with you.
The right to disagree? yes. Are you right in your disagreement? Nope. 6-24 hr days is what the scripture clearly shows.
I really wish we baptist folks could get over our hang up here. It makes us a laughing stock in the scientific community. Scientists KNOW the universe is billions of years old. It costs us our credibility with intellegent people when we demand that our Bible teaches that the earth is only 6-8 thousand years old.
The Bible does not teach this. Some of the greatest Hebrew scholars in history interpret the Genesis account as teaching an old earth. Some of the most reputable evangelicals in history have held to an old universe.
The Bible does not teach this. Some of the greatest Hebrew scholars in history interpret the Genesis account as teaching an old earth. Some of the most reputable evangelicals in history have held to an old universe.
Could you share with us where the Bible teaches that the earth is old. Also, scientists don't "KNOW" the universe is billions of years old. There are many flaws and assumptions in the dating methods that are used. Some are circular, some are selective.
As far as the OP, the Bible clearly teaches that the earth was created in 6 days. There is nothing in the language to cause one to think it wasn't a literal 6 days.
I could care less if I'm the "laughing stock in the scientific community." I'm going with what the Bible teaches, not what some scientist thinks.
Robert Snow
New Member
I was taught the Gap Theory when I was first saved in 1969, although the pastor of the church did not hold to this view. It didn't bother him that some disagreed with him.
In the early 80's at Tennessee Temple University, some of the people believed it; some didn't. I remember hearing the Vice President of the university, Dr. Faulkner mention support of the Gap Theory although, I believe, the President Dr. Lee Roberson did not. This did not cause a problem there either.
I see no reason for it to bother you the way it does. Some Christians believe it; some Christians don't.
Where in scripture do you get this?
The Bible remains a closed book to the natural man for it is foolishness unto them. Surprising to see professing believers fall away from the clear teaching of Genesis so they won't look bad to an unbelieving world.
That doesn't mean we ought to add to it's offense unnecessarily by making it look dumb.
Astronomers can observe light through telescopes and calculate the age of the universe. Google Hugh Ross- a fundamentalist, evangelical Christian astrophysicist and study up.
I thought like you once. I know where you are coming from. You're trying to defend the Word of God but you are actually doing so by making it say things it does not say which in turn hurts it. It does not teach that the earth is only several thousand years old.
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
Not going to debate with those who believe science interprets the Bible. I believe the world was created in 6 24 hour periods. That is what the Bible teaches. That is what Jesus taught.
- I believe in the biblical account of creation.
- I believe we should interpret the bible literally.
- I believe that there should be a harmony between God’s witness in creation and with his written word.
Many have observed evidences in nature that point to an ancient earth. These evidences cause us to look deeper into the text.
The scriptures provide sufficient evidence to allow an interpretation of the word “day” in Genesis 1 to mean something other than 24-hours.
One of these evidences can be quite clearly observed in Hebrews 4:3-11 where we see the Sabbath day as continuing even to the present time.
I feel the origin model called Progressive Creationism best harmonizes the information available in scripture and in nature.
This model presents the “day” in Genesis 1 as representing God’s workdays, time periods of unspecified length.
These days are broadly sequential and successive.
As God’s workday, they are analogous to our human work week (Exodus 3:17).
This broadened interpretation of the word “day” is supported in Psalm 90, a song of Moses, where a thousand years in God’s sight are likened to a night watch.
I believe this way of looking at the creation account is both simple and straightforward and best represents the originally intended meaning.
Rob
That's not fair nor helpful but a little self righteous.
You don't know that that's how I came to my conclusions so you ought to reserve such snotty remarks until you do.
BTW it isn't how I came to that conclusion. I studied the original language and great scholars and heroes of the faith on the matter.
I suppose you write off Spurgeon and John Phillips too?
Yea, but this position requires thinking. Why bother with such a silly notion? Hadn't you rather brandish your pitchforks and torches and burn at the stake as heretics those who challenge you to see something from a different perspective??
- Status