Was the world created millions and millions of years ago, part 2?

[Marcia]

You don't really mean that do you?
The majority interpretation wins??? NOOOooooo....

It is the glory of God to conceal a matter,
But the glory of kings is to search out a matter.
Proverbs 25:2 NASB95

Rob

My post has nothing to do with "the majority interpretation wins." It's about the integrity of God - He gives us the only account of creation and clearly states in very unambiguous terms that it took 6 days. He states this in Gen. 1 and Gen. 2, and restates it in Ex. 20 and I think in Ex. 31.

If these days were long ages, why didn't God just say it was a long time?He says 6 days, period. There is no mystery here. It is narrative, not parable and not visionary language. The creation account does not contradict the quote you have from Proverbs because God does not conceal everything - he clearly revealed quite a few things to us.

Adam is spoken of as an individual in Gen. and in the NT; there is no death before sin, therefore, animals did not live and die for millions of years before man was created (or evolved as some would have it).

Not only that, but the order in evolution is different from Genesis. So one is true and one is not. I choose Genesis.

Evolutionary Order (EO) vs. Biblical Order (BO)
EO Life in ocean before land plants
BO Land plants before life in ocean

EO Simple plants before fruit trees
BO Fruit trees, the first plants

EO Land animals before flowering plants
BO Flowering plants before land animals

EO Small animmals first land life
BO Cattle before creeping things

EO Dinosaurs evolved into birds
BO Birds before land animals

EO Land mammals evolved into whales
BO Whales before land animals

There's more; that's just some of it.

 

[Marcia]

No you got it wrong. Refer to post 208 where I explain why its not deceptive and how I view it.

I did read that but since God said "days," it does not mean millions of years. Your analogy that you give is not valid. This is not an issue of vague terms and leaving out details but of a specific account which is also referred to elsewhere.

Also, there is no biblical support in the account to interpret Gen. 1 the way you are interpreting. It's just the way you want to interpret it because you want the Bible to be compatible with evolution.

What people keep forgetting is that there is no real evidence for evolution.

 

[Jarthur001]

You also forgot Aristotle and how he came pretty close to calculating the diameter of the earth. Of course I know these people. However, at the time period which we are speaking of there is no evidence of this knowledge. And don't for get with the burning of the library at Alexandria a lot was lost. We see that the religious hacks of Galileo's day had a real problem with the earth not at the center of the universe. So discovered facts that go against the popular established religious view of science are often sneered at and later to be found true.

The time period that you stated was Ancient history. Everyone I know dates ancient history as the time before 500ad. I posted sources from a time much deeper into ancient history than this date.

A lot was lost not only in Alexandria but also from the Alps down through the hands Vandals. This was all within Gods plan. However, we still had the Bible which has always held the the earth is a globe.

You said..

science are often sneered at and later to be found true.

I believe you once again limit your views by what you see as a higher power. True the church has been wrong, but not as many times as science has been wrong. You seem to place your faith 1st on science followed by the Bible. Most believers change the order around.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I did read that but since God said "days," it does not mean millions of years. Your analogy that you give is not valid. This is not an issue of vague terms and leaving out details but of a specific account which is also referred to elsewhere.

Also, there is no biblical support in the account to interpret Gen. 1 the way you are interpreting. It's just the way you want to interpret it because you want the Bible to be compatible with evolution.

What people keep forgetting is that there is no real evidence for evolution.

You're last statement is pattenly untrue. And as far as biblical support I quoted the bible verbatim. Have you ever asked yourself why each day (stansa) ends with There was light then darkness the 1 day etc... It has to do with two aspects Refrain like in a song and this method was commonly used to help people remember things orally. Makes one wonder.

 

[canadyjd]

The person you quote has no understanding of the fundamental consept for evolution. Mutation is one aspect but the more significant aspect is natural selection. Which this is a perfect example. You have one moth with the mutation of pigmitation. the Moth is then able to spread its gene as it is the only survivor. Natural selection perfectly at work which has everything to do with the theory of evolution and populations.

You are seeing something that isn't there. There was no mutation. The different colors of the moth were part of an existing genetic code within that species of moth. The genetic code was created by God in the creation of the species and it hasn't mutated at all.

peace to youraying:

 

[Revmitchell]

Hitler believed in evolution.

 

[Martin]

I have read this thread with great interest. A lot of going in circles, you guys must be very dizzy. :laugh:

Some very interesting points, some very stupid points, some very pointless points. I guess that is what you get when you have a 20+ page discussion on the meaning of Genesis 1-2?

Wow. My ADD would not allow me to concentrate on one topic so long. I commend all of you non-ADD types who have stuck with it so long.

God did know but he also knew if he "broke it down to us" we would be confused so he got his point across in a way we would understand. Just like Jesus told parables to get his point across.

==There is no textual reason to believe that Genesis 1-2 is a parable. As to whether to days are literal 24-hour periods or not, we really don't know. The Scriptures never answer that point directly. How long ago were the events of Gen. 1-2? Again, the Scriptures never answer that point. The method used to arrive at the 6,000 year number is interesting but not endorsed by Scripture. Anyway, gaps in genealogies (etc) make such a method questionable.

Now, I am going to make a stunning statement. Get ready!

Other than God, and maybe the angels, nobody knows how old the earth is. I rather figure it is older than 6,000 years but much younger than 4.5 billion years old. We don't know the exact age because (a) human science is flawed by sinful reasoning, lack of information, and bias (b) the Bible does not answer the question (God did not see fit to provide the answer). I suppose that means that the exact age of the earth is one of the secret things that belong to the Lord. As for evolution, it is false. Death is a result of sin and not a natural part of life on this planet. That one fact alone deals the death nail to the theory of evolution.

As for the days of Genesis, I rather think they were literal "days" then. How those days measure with our "days" is known to God but not us. Were they 24-hour periods? 36-hour periods? I don't know. However I really doubt millions of years could realistically be called a day even then. At the end of the day, we can't know the exact length of the days in Genesis 1 & 2.

the movements of the moon rather than from the bible

==I think that is the very point Genesis makes.

14Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so.

At one time I was a hardcore 6-day, 6,000 year person. However I had to ask myself the question: Where in the Bible is 6,000 years stated or taught? The answer is simple: It is not. The 6,000 year figure is something man came up with by counting the age of men/women in Scripture and then going backwards. The Bible never endorses this method and considering the gaps in the geneologies and lack of time indicators (Gen 1:1,2) it is hard to know if the method even works.


Now that I have offended everyone on both sides of the debate, I will return to my hole that I have been hiding in. Though I must admit that I am looking forward to the remarks that my comments will inspire.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Hitler believed in evolution.

And so did her son, Adolf :sleep:

 

[Ed Edwards]

Martin: // Wow. My ADD would not allow me to concentrate on one topic so long. I commend all of you non-ADD types who have stuck with it so long. //

Yep as an adult the question was my main one from 1964 (age 21 back then) to 1976. My main interest was: how long does it take God to make a 55-gallon barrel of crude oil? (BTW, crude oil only supplies some 11% of the USA's energy over the year) How long did it take God to make the 21 Million Barrels of crude oil imported into the US from outside the US PER DAY (2003-2007 average)? (that is 7666 Million barrels per year) Compare to US domestic Crude Oil production in 2007 /all year/ of 1,860 Million barrels.

It makes a big difference to the World if it Took God 6 days to make all the Crude Oil or 2.2 Billion years.

The witness of the young earth folks is:
It is ours and we are going to take all the earth stuff for ourselves
- with nuclear arms if necessary.

The witness of the old earth earth folks is:
Let us share the earth stuff with other folks (both on the earth now and folks that might be on the earth later).

Now which one is Christan?

 

[OldRegular]

What people keep forgetting is that there is no real evidence for evolution.

You are correct, there is absolutely no evidence for macro-evolution.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I have read this thread with great interest. A lot of going in circles, you guys must be very dizzy. :laugh:

Some very interesting points, some very stupid points, some very pointless points. I guess that is what you get when you have a 20+ page discussion on the meaning of Genesis 1-2?

Wow. My ADD would not allow me to concentrate on one topic so long. I commend all of you non-ADD types who have stuck with it so long.




==There is no textual reason to believe that Genesis 1-2 is a parable. As to whether to days are literal 24-hour periods or not, we really don't know. The Scriptures never answer that point directly. How long ago were the events of Gen. 1-2? Again, the Scriptures never answer that point. The method used to arrive at the 6,000 year number is interesting but not endorsed by Scripture. Anyway, gaps in genealogies (etc) make such a method questionable.

Now, I am going to make a stunning statement. Get ready!

Other than God, and maybe the angels, nobody knows how old the earth is. I rather figure it is older than 6,000 years but much younger than 4.5 billion years old. We don't know the exact age because (a) human science is flawed by sinful reasoning, lack of information, and bias (b) the Bible does not answer the question (God did not see fit to provide the answer). I suppose that means that the exact age of the earth is one of the secret things that belong to the Lord. As for evolution, it is false. Death is a result of sin and not a natural part of life on this planet. That one fact alone deals the death nail to the theory of evolution.

As for the days of Genesis, I rather think they were literal "days" then. How those days measure with our "days" is known to God but not us. Were they 24-hour periods? 36-hour periods? I don't know. However I really doubt millions of years could realistically be called a day even then. At the end of the day, we can't know the exact length of the days in Genesis 1 & 2.



==I think that is the very point Genesis makes.

14Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so.

At one time I was a hardcore 6-day, 6,000 year person. However I had to ask myself the question: Where in the Bible is 6,000 years stated or taught? The answer is simple: It is not. The 6,000 year figure is something man came up with by counting the age of men/women in Scripture and then going backwards. The Bible never endorses this method and considering the gaps in the geneologies and lack of time indicators (Gen 1:1,2) it is hard to know if the method even works.


Now that I have offended everyone on both sides of the debate, I will return to my hole that I have been hiding in. Though I must admit that I am looking forward to the remarks that my comments will inspire.

I haven't disagreed with you. I've already admitted I don't know how God made the universe but I don't buy into God wanting us to have a literal interpretation of Genesis. Which was my point all along. I think its limiting to God.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You are correct, there is absolutely no evidence for macro-evolution.

Nice qualifier. So there is some validity to evolution even if you only believe in it on a micro level.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You are seeing something that isn't there. There was no mutation. The different colors of the moth were part of an existing genetic code within that species of moth. The genetic code was created by God in the creation of the species and it hasn't mutated at all.

peace to youraying:

What causes someone to be an Albino? Do you understand that mutations start in your genetic code?

 

[annsni]

I haven't disagreed with you. I've already admitted I don't know how God made the universe but I don't buy into God wanting us to have a literal interpretation of Genesis. Which was my point all along. I think its limiting to God.

So God wanted us to have a lie instead? I don't understand that. Is it limiting to God to have the story of Jesus' life, death and resurrection? What's the difference?

 

[annsni]

Nice qualifier. So there is some validity to evolution even if you only believe in it on a micro level.

Honestly, that's like saying "You had a spontaneous abortion? Then you believe in abortion - even if it's spontaneous."

BTW - a spontaneous abortion is the medical term for a miscarriage.

Just because it has the same term doesn't mean that they're related in the least.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

So God wanted us to have a lie instead? I don't understand that. Is it limiting to God to have the story of Jesus' life, death and resurrection? What's the difference?

You're regurgitating your own information. I've already explained how its not a lie. Post 208 once again. The last two sentences are leaps of logic that have no basis in anything I've said.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Honestly, that's like saying "You had a spontaneous abortion? Then you believe in abortion - even if it's spontaneous."

BTW - a spontaneous abortion is the medical term for a miscarriage.

Just because it has the same term doesn't mean that they're related in the least.

Again with the leaps of logic. No comparison.

 

[Jim1999]

The Jews do not always measure a day in 24 hour periods........They often called a day a day once the sun set and their sabbath began.......

A day in the Bible is not always a 24 hour period as we know it. In the eternal sense, a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

In Genesis we have two Adams; the adamic creation, and later the named Adam. Check out the first three chapters and see when Adam is actually named.

I am not arguing about how many years of creation is involved, but there are areas of the universe NOT mentioned in scripture.

The are serious questions about the universality of the flood, and also the crossing of the Red Sea, or was it really the end known as the Reed Sea, which does experience natural divides at times?

Cheers,

Jim

 

[OldRegular]

Nice qualifier. So there is some validity to evolution even if you only believe in it on a micro level.

That is the qualifier that matters and if you know anything about the claims of evolutionists you are aware of it Thinkingstuff. Micro-evolution really has nothing to do with macro-evolution.

 

[StefanM]

So God wanted us to have a lie instead? I don't understand that.

One could say the same about the apparent age of the earth. If the earth is so young, why does it appear so old?