But that 2% was WAY off the mark though huhIt is about 98% correct.
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!
But that 2% was WAY off the mark though huhIt is about 98% correct.
Now you are changing your story. We were talking about creating the heavens and the earth not all life.Is this where you once again argue that no matter what scripture says you find no reason to accept the Bible truth that God CREATED all life on earth in 7 days???
J. Jump said:But that 2% was WAY off the mark though huhI never read it. I just remember it sitting in the pew in front of me.
I really have no idea how you can miss a very literal creation in a very literal 6 days. For Scripture, start at Genesis 1.J. Jump said:But nowhere in Scripture does it say those six days are six days of creation. God simply made a statement that He did it in verse 1. He didn't tell us how long He took.
If He did please provide the Scriptural evidence.
I know you and I don't agree on a lot of things, but this is something we do agree on. The six days talked about are six literal 24-hour days. However I find nowhere in Scripture that these six days are tied to creation.
Can't tell you how many times I've read Genesis 1 and here's the only statement made about the creation of the heavens and the earth.For Scripture, start at Genesis 1.
It's connected by "now"...verse 2 is a continuation of the preview and summary found in verse 1. Everything following is part of that.Can't tell you how many times I've read Genesis 1 and here's the only statement made about the creation of the heavens and the earth.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
webdog said:I really have no idea how you can miss a very literal creation in a very literal 6 days. For Scripture, start at Genesis 1.
webdog said:It's connected by "now"...verse 2 is a continuation of the preview and summary found in verse 1. Everything following is part of that.
Well again you are partially correct. The possibility does exist that the waw in verse two is conjunctive. However the same possibility exists that the waw is disjunctive and could be translated "but" showing a disconnect.It's connected by "now"...verse 2 is a continuation of the preview and summary found in verse 1. Everything following is part of that.
Ed Edwards said:In the KJV there are many ANDs, some start sentences.
Ed Edwards said:My secular 3rd grade teacher told me not to start
sentences with AND. What is going on here & what
does that have to do with Titanic theology? :tonofbricks:
How so...and where? The fact alone God gave us this model (we are to works 6 days...rest on the seventh) goes to show His "work" took 6 days. If anything, Scripture supports a literal 6 day "work week".When we take the rest of Scripture it shows that the verses are disconnected.
Well I kind of laid that fondation in the previous post. If you want to go deeper then I would be more than happy to PM you with some resource material, but it would take too long to do any justice with that quesiton on the board. PM if you are interested.How so...and where?
Absolutely! I agree with this 100%. His work took six days. The question is was His work original creation or was His work redemptive. I think the whole of Scripture says His six days of work was a work of redemption. He was redeeming a ruined creation.The fact alone God gave us this model (we are to works 6 days...rest on the seventh) goes to show His "work" took 6 days. If anything, Scripture supports a literal 6 day "work week".