How do you young earthers know

[Dr. Walter]

Again, how does the supposed justification of a poetic symbolic hermeneutic of Geneis one stand up against how INSPIRED men interpreted "And God Said. Let there......and it was so" content of Genesis One?

Jesus interpreted Genesis 1:26 as literal non-poetic historical narrative.

David interpreted Genesis one as literal non-poetic historical narrative.

Peter interpreted Genesis one as literal non-poetic historical narrative.

God Himself interprets Genesis one as literal non-poetical historical narrative as the basis for the Fourth Commandment.




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


Did those who wrote under inspiration give credence to a poetic symbolic heremeneutic in Genesis One or see it as Literal and historical?:

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.[/B]


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.


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.

Those who interpret the Genesis record so that billions of years take place between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:26-27 are making Christ a liar. Those who teach evolution or theistic evolution are making Christ a liar. 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.

 

[matt wade]

Oh how nice is must be to obtain perfection....

WM

I've never claimed to be perfect, but I also don't shape my postings on here for each individual poster as you seem to do. You seem to think that your post was perfectly acceptable to post at me, but when you figured out that you were actually replying to one of mandym's posts, you changed your tune. That simply shows that you were out to attack me individually rather than the content of the post.

I'm not attacking you individually. I'm attacking the content of your posts. If Dr. Walter or any other poster posted the things you did, I would attack the content of their posts.

 

[Eric B]

You are wrong in your position and so your trying to make this a personal thing. Enough!

If YOU are holding a position that repudiates the words of Christ, thus making a liar out of Christ, then YOU are the one responsible for embracing such a position. Nobody twisted your arm to take that position, YOU took it of your own accord and YOU are still embracing it and therefore IN PRINCIPLE it is YOU that calls Christ a liar by willfully taking that position. And until you repudiate that position it is YOU that will continue calling Christ a liar by YOUR position/interpretation.

That's what I figured. But you were then trying to deny assigning a motive to the people ("position" not "person"), yet now you argue that it is the person when they take the offending doctrine. Fine. But the point was, with that method, unless you're 100% perfect in all doctrine, you could be condemning yourself as well, somewhere. Unless of course, you maintain that you are in fact 100% right on everything.

 

[Dr. Walter]

That's what I figured. But you were then trying to deny assigning a motive to the people ("position" not "person"), yet now you argue that it is the person when they take the offending doctrine.

You are just as wrong in your whining here as in your hermeneutical approach to Genesis 1:27. No one has assigned any kind of motive to anyone. That is a figment of your imagination. What we have done is charged those who embrace the theory that the days in Gensis one is symbolic of billions of years as a theory that directly contradicts the explicit and clear words of Jesus Christ in regard to the TIME FRAME he places on Gensis one.

If YOU embrace that theory then YOU are chargable with that contradiction - just that simple. Your rediculous response that one must be theologically sinless in order to point out that a postion flatly contradicts the words of Jesus Christ is absurd! According to the same logic no one could be charged with heresy of any kind unless the person charging them was PERFECT theologically. That is rediculous! Get over it!

I have once again placed the Biblical evidence above that denies your hermeneutic theory based upon Genesis 1:27 provides contextual merit for an interpretation of symbolism of the days in Genesis one. Mere hebrew parallelism does not give credence for the idea of poetic symbolism used in Genesis One. Hebrew parallelism simply repeats a truth a different way but does not infer or demand poetic symbolism is in view.

 

[12strings]

Would you at least accept that we do not know how long the "earth" existed before Genesis 1:2 - "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

It could have been a day, it could have been millions of years, it could have been an immeasurable amount of time that existed before God created time.

 

[mandym]

Would you at least accept that we do not know how long the "earth" existed before Genesis 1:2 - "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

It could have been a day, it could have been millions of years, it could have been an immeasurable amount of time that existed before God created time.

No it couldnt have

 

[WestminsterMan]

I've never claimed to be perfect, but I also don't shape my postings on here for each individual poster as you seem to do. You seem to think that your post was perfectly acceptable to post at me, but when you figured out that you were actually replying to one of mandym's posts, you changed your tune. That simply shows that you were out to attack me individually rather than the content of the post.

I'm not attacking you individually. I'm attacking the content of your posts. If Dr. Walter or any other poster posted the things you did, I would attack the content of their posts.

I simply appologized for my mistake. Take or leave it. Now how about answering some of my questions.

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Would you at least accept that we do not know how long the "earth" existed before Genesis 1:2 - "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

It could have been a day, it could have been millions of years, it could have been an immeasurable amount of time that existed before God created time.

No one has yet to respond to the challenge I keep reposting (Post 201)! It is IMPOSSIBLE to harmonize a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3 with what Jesus said. He said that God made man "AT THE BEGINNING" of creation not millions or billions of years AFTER the beginning of creation!!!!

 

[12strings]

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.

Those who interpret the Genesis record so that billions of years take place between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:26-27 are making Christ a liar. Those who teach evolution or theistic evolution are making Christ a liar. 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.

1. It is possible, if unlikely, that Jesus was refering to either the creation of humanity, or the creation account that begins in Genesis 1:3 with day one. It is curious that when God himself said He created the heavens and earth in 6 days and rested the seventh day; He did not include Gen. 1:1-2...He did not include the actual creation of the earth itself! So God's own account of "creation" begins AFTER the actual creation of the formless, void planet earth.

2. Jesus also said I should cut off my hand, gouge out my eye, and hate my mother, father, and wife. Some interpretation is necessary to make sense of those passages with the rest of scripture.

3. It is possibilities like this that tame me from saying a Gap Theorist who accepts a literal 6-day creation and a literal Adam and Eve is automatically calling Christ a Liar.

 

[Dr. Walter]

appologized.

WM

Did you mean present tense "apologize" or did I miss a post where you already apologized? In any case I commend you for it.:thumbsup:

 

[WestminsterMan]

No one has yet to respond to the challenge I keep reposting (Post 201)! It is IMPOSSIBLE to harmonize a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3 with what Jesus said. He said that God made man "AT THE BEGINNING" of creation not millions or billions of years AFTER the beginning of creation!!!!

Well doc, that would hold water if Genesis was describing the creation event as a chronologically accurate timeline. However, there are places in the text itself that deny it's chronological accuracy. I.e. that light was created on the first day, but the sun was not created till the fourth day (Gen. 1:3, 16), that Adam was told he would die the same "day" as he ate of the tree, yet he lived to be 930 years old (Gen. 2:17, 5:5).

You cannot have it both ways.

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Well doc, that would hold water if Genesis was describing the creation event as a chronologically accurate timeline. However, there are places in the text itself that deny it's chronological accuracy. I.e. that light was created on the first day, but the sun was not created till the fourth day (Gen. 1:3, 16), that Adam was told he would die the same "day" as he ate of the tree, yet he lived to be 930 years old (Gen. 2:17, 5:5).

You cannot have it both ways.

WM

I have no clue what you are talking about? How does the creation of light contradict the creation of light bearers? Are you saying it is impossible for God to create light in transient instead of requiring light to travel millions of light years???

Don't you understand the fundmental nature of death? Can't you distinguish between spiritual death which occurred immediately and the consequences which occur over a long period of time "dying that shalt surely die"????

Your objections are really not very serious objections except maybe in your own mind.

Again, you are repudiating the explicit and clear language of Christ. His language explicitly demands a specific and limited time frame for the creation of man in regard to the beginning point of creation.

 

[DHK]

Well doc, that would hold water if Genesis was describing the creation event as a chronologically accurate timeline. However, there are places in the text itself that deny it's chronological accuracy. I.e. that light was created on the first day, but the sun was not created till the fourth day (Gen. 1:3, 16), that Adam was told he would die the same "day" as he ate of the tree, yet he lived to be 930 years old (Gen. 2:17, 5:5).

You cannot have it both ways.

WM

We have no idea how long Adam was in the garden before he sinned. It is assumed by many that his age was calculated from the Fall.
Furthermore, he did died the same day. His death was spiritual. Death is separation. He was immediately separated from God by his sin.

 

[billwald]

> Are you saying it is impossible for God to create light in transient instead of requiring light to travel millions of light years???

Much of Christian theology is about telling God what he can't do, such as electing a person who will never hear about Jesus.

But if God created the universe as you say then it is a "virtual" universe and not a physical universe. A mystical/magical fairy tale universe.

 

[WestminsterMan]

I have no clue what you are talking about? How does the creation of light contradict the creation of light bearers? Are you saying it is impossible for God to create light in transient instead of requiring light to travel millions of light years???

Don't you understand the fundmental nature of death? Can't you distinguish between spiritual death which occurred immediately and the consequences which occur over a long period of time "dying that shalt surely die"????

Oh I see...so his spirit dies immediately but his body continued to live for 930 years. I would point you to James 2:26: "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead." Right...

Your objections are really not very serious objections except maybe in your own mind.

So you say, doc.

Again, you are repudiating the explicit and clear language of Christ. His language explicitly demands a specific and limited time frame for the creation of man in regard to the beginning point of creation.

Only if you ignore all of the evidence God has left for us. Besides, as I've already shown you, many of the Early Church Fathers favored an old Earth.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

We have no idea how long Adam was in the garden before he sinned. It is assumed by many that his age was calculated from the Fall. Furthermore, he did died the same day. His death was spiritual. Death is separation. He was immediately separated from God by his sin.

Death is the seperation of the spirit from the body. Besides Genesis doesn't say that Adam would die a "spritual death" ... it just said he would die, which was the opposite state they where in before the fall - a state that took him 930 years to get to - not one 24 hour day. Ooops...

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Oh I see...so his spirit dies immediately but his body continued to live for 930 years. I would point you to James 2:26: "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead." Right...

I thought you understood basic theological concepts? Guess I was wrong? Let me stimulate your thinking a bit. Paul says to the Ephesians that they were "dead" in tresspasses and sins but God quickened, made them alive. Were they "dead" physically and God quickened them? What was "dead" that had to be quickened? They were obviously PHYSICALLY alive and so they were not made alive PHYSICALLY!

Now, take this back to Adam. He obviously did not die PHYSICALLY for hundreds of years after the fall. However, did Adam need to be quickened like the Epheisans? If so, what aspect of Adam was dead that needed to be quickened other than any PHYSICAL aspect? What aspect of the Ephesians needed quickening other than their PHYSICAL aspect???

DHK spelled it out for you but use your mind. The same answer you give for the Ephesians is the same answer for Adam. The Ephesians were born "dead" in tresspasses and sins but Adam was not created "dead" in tresspasses and sins was he???? So when did it occur? When did he die and need to be quickened?

Only if you ignore all of the evidence God has left for us. Besides, as I've already shown you, many of the Early Church Fathers favored an old Earth.

Is it really a matter of ignoring the evidence or merely one interpretation of the evidence? Do so-called Early Church Father's trump INSPIRED writings on this subject? Why should we take the word of any man that blantantly contradicts the words of Christ and the apotles?

 

[WestminsterMan]

I have no clue what you are talking about? How does the creation of light contradict the creation of light bearers? Are you saying it is impossible for God to create light in transient instead of requiring light to travel millions of light years???

No I am not. I am simply stating the obvious and that is that God created the Sun to proivde light to the Earth and that light would only take around eight minutes to reach the Earth, which in turn means that he created the Sun first. Its obvious from that fact alone that Genesis is not chronologically acurate and was never inteded to be so.

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Death is the seperation of the spirit from the body. Besides Genesis doesn't say that Adam would die a "spritual death" ... it just said he would die, which was the opposite state they where in before the fall - a state that took him 930 years to get to - not one 24 hour day. Ooops...

WM

So the spirits of the Ephesians had separated from their bodies and God made them alive again (quickened) by rejoining their spirits with their bodies????????? - Eph. 2:1??

How then do you explain Ephesians 2:2-3 which describe their activities while being "dead" in that sense???????

 

[Dr. Walter]

No I am not. I am simply stating the obvious and that is that God created the Sun to proivde light to the Earth and that light would only take around eight minutes to reach the Earth, which in turn means that he created the Sun first. Its obvious from that fact alone that Genesis is not chronologically acurate and was never inteded to be so.

WM

Does the text actually say he created "sunlight" or merely the light bearers - sun, moon, stars with the design to provide light?