Do you believe that there has been millions and millions of years?

[Alcott]

Yes or No: Does a day always begin with the setting of the sun?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Yes, that is a point. We were not there to see the time that He does not see as we do-- especially the beginning of it all on that day which did not begin with the rising or setting of the sun, which was not there to rise or set.

And since we weren't there, wouldn't it be prudent to accept the word of the one who was there?

 

[annsni]

You do know that these questions HAVE been answered by literalists, right?

They were Adam and Eve's children, and their childrens childrens, ect...

No, not in the same manner as God did Eve. She was part of his own family lineage. Actaully more like a neice.


Yep, still no problem biblically. What you don't have the age of Cain when all this transpired. And since men at that time lived well past 500 years you can bet the house was getting a little small.


Since Adam was obedient to what God said, and the fact the he and Eve were married, we can pretty much guess that they were there less than 9 months. Probably 'much' less.


Scripture says that God brought the animals which He had made "out of the ground" to Adam and thus Adam named all these animals.

Does this state that Adam named all the animals in the seas or Oceans or the land?


The answers have been given them and I don't know of any that have been driven off becauase of attitude but more because they don't believe what scripture actaully states is true. They say it must be a myth because we can not concieve such a thing happening.


Why?

Satan is not a creator nor does scripture even ascribe to him the power to create.
But there were no 'creature' prior to Adam other than animals.


The only substance to this position is that of conjecture. There is nothing in scripture which substantiates the claim that other humans existed when Adam was created.

Another point - fallen angels could not have 'mated' with humans or Jesus was liar. He said that they can not 'reproduce'. Also in accordence with God's decree all things reproduce 'after their own kind'. A spirit has no substance whereby to procreate with any way. Thus Jesus own statement when His disciples thought He was a spirit. He said basically - touch me and feel the scars. You can not touch a spirit but me you can. (no substance).


Where does scripture state this?


True, but we can place a pretty sure bet it was not longer than 9 months at most!


Then you misunderstand the work 'mankind' and 'man' and 'Adam'.

Spot on!! Good answers! :wavey:

 

[Alcott]

And since we weren't there, wouldn't it be prudent to accept the word of the one who was there?

Yes, as long as you take into consideration your own statement, that He "does not see time as we do," and recall that He gave a promise to the Israelites that they would have the land they were going to forever, and then clarified that to mean the "children of promise" who believe in Christ, while letting Abe's physical descendants be driven out for many centuries, which puts a dent in "forever," unless that means something besdies 'for all time.'

 

[Pastor Larry]

Yes, as long as you take into consideration your own statement, that He "does not see time as we do," and recall that He gave a promise to the Israelites that they would have the land they were going to forever, and then clarified that to mean the "children of promise" who believe in Christ, while letting Abe's physical descendants be driven out for many centuries, which puts a dent in "forever," unless that means something besdies 'for all time.'

But the phrase as used in Gen 1 only ever means 24 hour days. It is not like the term used to describe the inheritance of the land (and your understanding of that is wrong here, though that is off topic).

God inspired the use of a phrase that only even means 24 hour days. Yet there are some who say that God didn't know what he was talking about when he inspired the use of that phrase ... he really meant something else.

 

[Alcott]

The day was divided into 24 equal parts before there was light and dark? Not if a day is from "setting" of the sun till the next setting thereof-- consider now, as to us in the northern hemisphere, the days are getting "longer;" they are almost 24 hours and 2 minutes right now.

 

[Pastor Larry]

The day was divided into 24 equal parts before there was light and dark?

Really? Where's this found?

 

[Alcott]

I was asking you, as you said a day in Genesis 1 never means anything other than 24 hours.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I was asking you, as you said a day in Genesis 1 never means anything other than 24 hours.

I said the construction used in Gen 1 never is used of anything other than a 24 hour day. I am not sure what your question is. If God established time, then he certainly doesn't need the sun to measure 24 hours does he?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I said the construction used in Gen 1 never is used of anything other than a 24 hour day. I am not sure what your question is. If God established time, then he certainly doesn't need the sun to measure 24 hours does he?

I think Yom can be used for both 24 hour day and Eon or age.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I think Yom can be used for both 24 hour day and Eon or age.

You are correct. It can be, along with several other uses as any Hebrew lexicon will tell you. However, the grammatical construction used in Gen 1 to describe the creation days is never used for anything other than 24 hour days.

You see, you have to realize that words are used in context, in conjunction with other words. Those other words inform the use of the word under consideration. So YOM is not used in isolation. It is used with other words that make clear what it being talked about.

 

[annsni]

I think Yom can be used for both 24 hour day and Eon or age.

That is correct unless it's paired with an ordinal number. Then it always means a 24 hour day. Not to mention that "evening and morning" would mean a 24 hour day as well.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You are correct. It can be, along with several other uses as any Hebrew lexicon will tell you. However, the grammatical construction used in Gen 1 to describe the creation days is never used for anything other than 24 hour days.

You see, you have to realize that words are used in context, in conjunction with other words. Those other words inform the use of the word under consideration. So YOM is not used in isolation. It is used with other words that make clear what it being talked about.

I'm not sure what you mean? :laugh:

You see, you to realize that words are used in context... in ... other words...you...are...clear...what...It is...being talked about

Also, you would be correct if the context was not a device to show the order of creation or an outline of it. In which case if it is you would be incorrect.

 

[Revmitchell]

We are invited, brethren, most earnestly to go away from the old-fashioned belief of our forefathers because of the supposed discoveries of science. What is science? The method by which man tries to conceal his ignorance. It should not be so, but so it is. You are not to be dogmatical in theology, my brethren, it is wicked; but for scientific men it is the correct thing. You are never to assert anything very strongly; but scientists may boldly assert what they cannot prove, and may demand a faith far more credulous than any we possess. Forsooth, you and I are to take our Bibles and shape and mould our belief according to the evershifting teachings of so-called scientific men. What folly is this! Why, the march of science, falsely so called, through the world may be traced by exploded fallacies and abandoned theories. Former explorers once adored are now ridiculed; the continual wreckings of false hypotheses is a matter of universal notoriety. You may tell where the learned have encamped by the debris left behind of suppositions and theories as plentiful as broken bottles.

C.H. Spurgeon, The Sword and the Trowel, 1877, 197

 

[Pastor Larry]

I'm not sure what you mean?

If you will tell me what you are not sure about, I will try to clarify.

Also, you would be correct if the context was not a device to show the order of creation or an outline of it. In which case if it is you would be incorrect.

No, I am correct anyway ... Word always and only have meaning in context. If you separate it from the words around it, you don't know what it means.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

If you will tell me what you are not sure about, I will try to clarify.

No, I am correct anyway ... Word always and only have meaning in context. If you separate it from the words around it, you don't know what it means.

No that's not what I meant. I mean your context premise. If your starting point is not meant to be literal neither can the words around it.

 

[Marcia]

Yes or No: Does a day always begin with the setting of the sun?

Apparently, in the first 4 days, it did not. But God still defined those first 4 days as days by speaking of a morning and evening. And we knew there was light, so there was light and darkness.

The sun and moon being created on day 4 showed that
1. God was putting down the worship of the sun and moon as gods at that time
2. God does not need the sun and moon for time, because God creates time; He is not dependent on heavenly bodies the way the pagan gods allegedly were
3. The sun was created to "rule over the day" and the moon to "rule over the night," showing that day and night already existed
4. If a day was not a day but was a long period of time, there would be indication in the text, but there is not. Why didn't God just say a long period of time or many years instead of a day?
5. If 6 days in Gen 1 is wrong, then God is lying in Ex. 20 when he repeats that the world was created in 6 days.

 

[Marcia]

That is correct unless it's paired with an ordinal number. Then it always means a 24 hour day. Not to mention that "evening and morning" would mean a 24 hour day as well.

And not to mention God repeats that he created the world in 6 days in Exodus 20! :wavey:

 

[OldRegular]

We are invited, brethren, most earnestly to go away from the old-fashioned belief of our forefathers because of the supposed discoveries of science. What is science? The method by which man tries to conceal his ignorance. It should not be so, but so it is. You are not to be dogmatical in theology, my brethren, it is wicked; but for scientific men it is the correct thing. You are never to assert anything very strongly; but scientists may boldly assert what they cannot prove, and may demand a faith far more credulous than any we possess. Forsooth, you and I are to take our Bibles and shape and mould our belief according to the evershifting teachings of so-called scientific men. What folly is this! Why, the march of science, falsely so called, through the world may be traced by exploded fallacies and abandoned theories. Former explorers once adored are now ridiculed; the continual wreckings of false hypotheses is a matter of universal notoriety. You may tell where the learned have encamped by the debris left behind of suppositions and theories as plentiful as broken bottles.

C.H. Spurgeon, The Sword and the Trowel, 1877, 197

Well said and so true! Spurgeon had a great gift of expressing the truth.

 

[Anthony]

Believe what you like it is your affair.
However if all you can do is say "believe or don't" to those new to the Bible who have questions that you just gloss over or ignore, then count on fewer new members of your congregation.

I make an effort to answer their questions and pray for knowledge of those answers.

Gen. 6:4 - which some of you seem to have ignored - says
"when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them".
Nephilim, "fallen ones" like Shemhazi, an angel of high rank, could most certainly have children by humans.

You seem to pick and choose scripture to support your opinions, and even dictate what God can or can't do, so I don't believe my place is in your congregation anymore as I can't go along with what you do.
One of you says God can't make a second a thousand years? God could do that and even more.

As for Cain and Nod - I see Abel, Cain and Seth. Cain went to Nod before Seth was born.
Did Cain or Abel marry their sisters and have children before Cain was driven out?
Incest?
Cain spoke of men killing him before Seth was born - what, his unnamed brothers by Adam?
Did Cain wait in Nod until Seth's children moved there perhaps?
It says Cain went to Nod and went into his wife - then Seth is mentioned. If Cain married a niece by Seth then mention of that would be after mention of Seth, not before.

You are making it up as you go along.

Scientists deserve salvation as much as Spurgeon did, but he insults them and places himself above them - my confidence in Spurgeon is undergoing a major downgrade.

I wish you well but believe you are in error and can't remain with you.

God bless