quantumfaith
Active Member
Oh I "respect" the intellect, articulate and well defended positions of the good Dr. I just don't agree in many instances. This being one of those instances.
-
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!
Issues with the slippery slope argument of literal 7-24 hour creationism
- Thread starter Anastasia
- Start date
quantumfaith
Active Member
What is the difference between the brain and the mind?
Could God have created the earth with the Grand Canyon on it already created?
He can do anything He wants, anyway He wants, anywhere He wants, anytime He wants.
Psalm 115:3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.
HankD
Hurricane Gloria occurred in the beginning of my marriage.
It was in September but I married in June. It was in the beginning but not the very first day of my marriage.
You are entitled to your "opinion". I may even agree with it, but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is you continuing to call many Godly men who hold to the Gap theory "making Christ a liar." This is unacceptable. You have already received an infraction for this. If you want some names all three of the Bob Jones: Sr., Jr., and the III, believe in the Gap Theory. To infer that these men are Christ deniers, calling Christ a liar is totally unacceptable and cannot be tolerated.
They have a different belief. We believe in soul liberty. They are not unsaved (the inference) for believing in their view. Please stop before you get more trouble on your hands then you can handle. Stick with what you believe (a literal interpretation) instead of castigating those that may have just as good arguments as you have for the Gap Theory but are not here to defend themselves.
Dr. Walter
New Member
You have one simple choice. You can believe and follow how UNINSPIRED men interpret Genesis 1-2 or you can believe and follow how INSPIRED men interpret Genesis 1-2 but you cannot embrace both because they are contradictory to each other.
Uninspired men interpet Genesis 1 to include a gap of millions of years between the beginning of the universe and the appearance of man on earth. Many uninspired men suggest that Genesis 1 is primarily poetic in nature and must be understood figuratively rather than literally. However, is this how inspired men regarded Genesis 1?
1. In regard to the first issue:
Literal statement or figurative words:
1 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Literal statement or figuragive words:
And God said, let there be....and it was so - v. 1
And God said, let there be....and it was so- v. 6
And God said, let the....and it was so- v. 9
And God said, let the.....and it was so - v. 11
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 14
And God said, let the......- v. 20
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 24
And God said, let the.....- v. 26
And God said, let the.... - v. 29
This statement permeates the entire account. How did other Biblical writers view the above characterization that permeates every single day of Genesis One? As a literal or symbolic view
Heb. 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Ps 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Does the following Hebrew parallelism indicate symbolism or emphasis of literal and historical record?
Ps 33:9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
Ps 148:5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.
Peter spoke of Evolutionists and Theistic Evolutionists after this manner:
2Pe 3:5 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:
God interpreted the six days of creation and the seventh day of rest in a LITERAL HISTORICAL manner by making it the EXAMPLE for humans to apply on a week by week basis:
Ex. 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
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.
2. In regard to the Second issue (gap) between the origin of creation and the origin of man:
Jesus denied any hermeneutic that allowed for the days in Genesis One to be interpreted as symbolic or figurative of millions and billions of years between the origin of the universe and the origin of the human specie.
Mt 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mr 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Gen. 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Every single day of the six days there was a "beginning" of something new on each day, therefore the whole six days of creation could justly be called "the beginning of creation." However, such words cannot possiby be applied to the origin of man if it took place thousands, millions or billions of years after the origin of the earth.
Man did not originate billions of years AFTER the origin of the universe but "AT THE BEGINNING" and thus "FROM THE BEGINNING of the creation of God.
Inspired men literally interpreted "And God said" as the literal origin of creation and Jesus denied there were millions of years gap between "the beginning of creation" and the appearance of man on earth as he explicitly refers to Genesis 1:26-27. and places it "AT the beginning" of the creation rather than millions of years aftewards.
Uninspired men interpet Genesis 1 to include a gap of millions of years between the beginning of the universe and the appearance of man on earth. Many uninspired men suggest that Genesis 1 is primarily poetic in nature and must be understood figuratively rather than literally. However, is this how inspired men regarded Genesis 1?
1. In regard to the first issue:
Literal statement or figurative words:
1 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Literal statement or figuragive words:
And God said, let there be....and it was so - v. 1
And God said, let there be....and it was so- v. 6
And God said, let the....and it was so- v. 9
And God said, let the.....and it was so - v. 11
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 14
And God said, let the......- v. 20
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 24
And God said, let the.....- v. 26
And God said, let the.... - v. 29
This statement permeates the entire account. How did other Biblical writers view the above characterization that permeates every single day of Genesis One? As a literal or symbolic view
Heb. 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Ps 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Does the following Hebrew parallelism indicate symbolism or emphasis of literal and historical record?
Ps 33:9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
Ps 148:5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.
Peter spoke of Evolutionists and Theistic Evolutionists after this manner:
2Pe 3:5 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:
God interpreted the six days of creation and the seventh day of rest in a LITERAL HISTORICAL manner by making it the EXAMPLE for humans to apply on a week by week basis:
Ex. 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
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.
2. In regard to the Second issue (gap) between the origin of creation and the origin of man:
Jesus denied any hermeneutic that allowed for the days in Genesis One to be interpreted as symbolic or figurative of millions and billions of years between the origin of the universe and the origin of the human specie.
Mt 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mr 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Gen. 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Every single day of the six days there was a "beginning" of something new on each day, therefore the whole six days of creation could justly be called "the beginning of creation." However, such words cannot possiby be applied to the origin of man if it took place thousands, millions or billions of years after the origin of the earth.
Man did not originate billions of years AFTER the origin of the universe but "AT THE BEGINNING" and thus "FROM THE BEGINNING of the creation of God.
Inspired men literally interpreted "And God said" as the literal origin of creation and Jesus denied there were millions of years gap between "the beginning of creation" and the appearance of man on earth as he explicitly refers to Genesis 1:26-27. and places it "AT the beginning" of the creation rather than millions of years aftewards.
You are not an inspired man, but one of those uninspired men, and have no right to call into question the salvation of others that are uninspired because their interpretation differs from yours.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
I have to say that every time I see the title of this thread in the list of new posts, I am saddened. It saddens me that we consider believing the Bible as it is written is a "slippery slope". Oh how far have we fallen.
I see this as the single most issue over young people leaving the church. As our science becomes better and the evidence of an old earth accumilate, and Chruches still preaching young earth become more adament with each new piece of evidence supplied. Young people will see the facts as the truth and consider and issue of faith not supported by evidence of the facts they will leave.
And yes its sad.
Or we teach them the truth - we have an amazing creator. If Adam was not created as a zygote, then the earth very well could be created with age.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
That is a point. But would God have made the earth purposely deceptive? Would he have purposely created fossils of non-existant animals to give the apperance of age? Why would he have made an apperance of an Ice Age if there never was one? I mean we can look at finds and see different species of humans and note by dna that humans interbreed with other species of humans like the siberians. Is this dna made to look like that? I think not.
Evolution and old earth is disappearing and will one day be laughed at. There is no old earth science accumulating. Creationism and a young earth is however.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
I beg to differ.
Dr. Walter
New Member
I simply presented indisputable facts. The scripture were written by inspired men and those who intepret Genesis 1 contrary to them are simply WRONG. If you can't accept that, then that is your problem not mine.
I ommitted the offensive phrase about lying but I will not omit one syllable above and I will repeat it until I am banned.
To claim that I am saying those who disagree with me or with inspired writers concerning this subject is to claim they are unregenerate or lost is absurdly rediculous and you know it. I have never called into question, never inferred the salvation of anyone who disagreed with me on this subject. I clearly and explicitly denied that I was claiming such a thing. However, I will never back down from the above statement - never!
Dr. Walter
New Member
You have one simple choice. You can believe and follow how UNINSPIRED men interpret Genesis 1-2 or you can believe and follow how INSPIRED men interpret Genesis 1-2 but you cannot embrace both because they are contradictory to each other.
Uninspired men interpet Genesis 1 to include a gap of millions of years between the beginning of the universe and the appearance of man on earth. Many uninspired men suggest that Genesis 1 is primarily poetic in nature and must be understood figuratively rather than literally. However, is this how inspired men regarded Genesis 1?
1. In regard to the first issue:
Literal statement or figurative words:
1 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Literal statement or figuragive words:
And God said, let there be....and it was so - v. 1
And God said, let there be....and it was so- v. 6
And God said, let the....and it was so- v. 9
And God said, let the.....and it was so - v. 11
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 14
And God said, let the......- v. 20
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 24
And God said, let the.....- v. 26
And God said, let the.... - v. 29
This statement permeates the entire account. How did other Biblical writers view the above characterization that permeates every single day of Genesis One? As a literal or symbolic view
Heb. 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Ps 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Does the following Hebrew parallelism indicate symbolism or emphasis of literal and historical record?
Ps 33:9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
Ps 148:5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.
Peter spoke of Evolutionists and Theistic Evolutionists after this manner:
2Pe 3:5 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:
God interpreted the six days of creation and the seventh day of rest in a LITERAL HISTORICAL manner by making it the EXAMPLE for humans to apply on a week by week basis:
Ex. 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
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.
2. In regard to the Second issue (gap) between the origin of creation and the origin of man:
Jesus denied any hermeneutic that allowed for the days in Genesis One to be interpreted as symbolic or figurative of millions and billions of years between the origin of the universe and the origin of the human specie.
Mt 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mr 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Gen. 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Every single day of the six days there was a "beginning" of something new on each day, therefore the whole six days of creation could justly be called "the beginning of creation." However, such words cannot possiby be applied to the origin of man if it took place thousands, millions or billions of years after the origin of the earth.
Man did not originate billions of years AFTER the origin of the universe but "AT THE BEGINNING" and thus "FROM THE BEGINNING of the creation of God.
Inspired men literally interpreted "And God said" as the literal origin of creation and Jesus denied there were millions of years gap between "the beginning of creation" and the appearance of man on earth as he explicitly refers to Genesis 1:26-27. and places it "AT the beginning" of the creation rather than millions of years aftewards.
Uninspired men interpet Genesis 1 to include a gap of millions of years between the beginning of the universe and the appearance of man on earth. Many uninspired men suggest that Genesis 1 is primarily poetic in nature and must be understood figuratively rather than literally. However, is this how inspired men regarded Genesis 1?
1. In regard to the first issue:
Literal statement or figurative words:
1 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Literal statement or figuragive words:
And God said, let there be....and it was so - v. 1
And God said, let there be....and it was so- v. 6
And God said, let the....and it was so- v. 9
And God said, let the.....and it was so - v. 11
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 14
And God said, let the......- v. 20
And God said, let the.....and it was so- v. 24
And God said, let the.....- v. 26
And God said, let the.... - v. 29
This statement permeates the entire account. How did other Biblical writers view the above characterization that permeates every single day of Genesis One? As a literal or symbolic view
Heb. 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Ps 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Does the following Hebrew parallelism indicate symbolism or emphasis of literal and historical record?
Ps 33:9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
Ps 148:5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.
Peter spoke of Evolutionists and Theistic Evolutionists after this manner:
2Pe 3:5 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:
God interpreted the six days of creation and the seventh day of rest in a LITERAL HISTORICAL manner by making it the EXAMPLE for humans to apply on a week by week basis:
Ex. 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
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.
2. In regard to the Second issue (gap) between the origin of creation and the origin of man:
Jesus denied any hermeneutic that allowed for the days in Genesis One to be interpreted as symbolic or figurative of millions and billions of years between the origin of the universe and the origin of the human specie.
Mt 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mr 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Gen. 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Every single day of the six days there was a "beginning" of something new on each day, therefore the whole six days of creation could justly be called "the beginning of creation." However, such words cannot possiby be applied to the origin of man if it took place thousands, millions or billions of years after the origin of the earth.
Man did not originate billions of years AFTER the origin of the universe but "AT THE BEGINNING" and thus "FROM THE BEGINNING of the creation of God.
Inspired men literally interpreted "And God said" as the literal origin of creation and Jesus denied there were millions of years gap between "the beginning of creation" and the appearance of man on earth as he explicitly refers to Genesis 1:26-27. and places it "AT the beginning" of the creation rather than millions of years aftewards.
God would not be deceptive. I do not believe that the fossils were non-existant animals. I believe that the Ice Age has explanation. The DNA is easily explained just by nature of humans. That shows nothing of evolution. I don't understand the "humans interbreed with other species of humans". We're human. There may be different races but that's about it.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
We are significantly different than the Neandertahls. However, certain humans have been found to carry Neandertahls genetic markers. There are other species of humans as well. These genetically differ more than races differ. Here is an article http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/news/2011/january/ancient-denisovans-and-the-human-family-tree93500.html