Man made on 3rd Day

[Aman777]

Dear Readers, Man was made from the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day as the following Scriptures confirm;

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

The above verse is speaking of the 3rd Day, the same Day the Earth was made. Genesis 1:9-10 shows that this happened on the 3rd Day.

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

This verse is confirmation that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day for the plants GREW on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:12

6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Conclusion: On the 3rd Day after the Earth was made, but BEFORE the plants grew and before rain, the LORD God formed man. If you don't agree, then show us another time when man was made.

8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The above is further confirmation that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day, since the Trees were made AFTER man. That's God's Truth confirmed by Scripture. Some teach that man was formed of the dust on the 6th Day. Wonder why?

In Love,
Aman

 

[Assyrian]

Thanks for restarting.

Dear Readers, Man was made from the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day as the following Scriptures confirm;

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

The above verse is speaking of the 3rd Day, the same Day the Earth was made. Genesis 1:9-10 shows that this happened on the 3rd Day.

It can't be referring to the third day because that describe the forming of earth the seas and green plants, but not the heavens. Genesis 2:4 says in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. The only day in Genesis 1 that has God making earth and heavens is Day 1, but that doesn't work because the earth was left formless, void and deep under water. Other day mention God working on the heavens or on the earth, but not both. The only alternative is that 'in the day' refers to the whole period of creation, not a single 24 hour day.

Of course there is also the obvious problem is that the third day in Genesis 1 is about creating plants, not people. God made people on the 6th day.

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

This verse is confirmation that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day for the plants GREW on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:12

Genesis 1 certainly describes God making plants on day three, but not man. And while the two creation accounts describe God making plants, the conditions described in the world without plants are completely different, in Genesis 2 we see a dry arid wilderness where plants could not grow because the was no rain and there was no man to till the ground. In Genesis 1 day three starts off with the world under water and God has to separate land from waters before he creates plants, a lack of rain has nothing to do with the lack of plants. The reason there were no plants is that the earth had been deep under water until that morning, there was no time for plants to grow even if it hadn't been under water, that and the fact plants simply hadn't been created yet. Once they were created they grew up and we see plants yielding seeds and trees bearing fruit, days before God made man.

6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Conclusion: On the 3rd Day after the Earth was made, but BEFORE the plants grew and before rain, the LORD God formed man. If you don't agree, then show us another time when man was made.

Genesis 1 says God made man on the sixth day.

8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The above is further confirmation that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day, since the Trees were made AFTER man. That's God's Truth confirmed by Scripture. Some teach that man was formed of the dust on the 6th Day. Wonder why?

In Love,
Aman

What you have shown is that we need to find a way to reconcile the two creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2, because Genesis 2 describes God making man before he made plants and trees while Genesis 1 describes God making plants and trees three days before he made man. But we need to find a way to get the two creation account to fit that doesn't require rearranging the accounts to make them fit. Just because you can make some details fit together does not confirm your interpretation if you can only achieve this at the expense of what we are told throughout the rest of the text.

 

[granpa]

There were 2 Adams.
The first Adam was created on the 3rd day.
The second Adam (Logos) was created on the 6th day.

 

[Assyrian]

There were 2 Adams.
The first Adam was created on the 3rd day.
The second Adam (Logos) was created on the 6th day.

Sounds like Philo's idea, only he didn't link the Adam made from dust in Genesis 2 back to day three in Genesis 1. He still had the heavenly Adam, the Logos created on day 6, and called him the first Adam, the earthly Adam was the the second Adam.

Who do you see the Logos being fruitful and multiplying with?

 

[Aman777]

Grandpa:>>There were 2 Adams.
The first Adam was created on the 3rd day.

Dear Grandpa, I love you, but the first Adam was "formed" on the 3rd Day. He was the first Adam and was made by the hands of Jesus from the dust of the ground. The second Adam was created by the Trinity at the SAME time Eve was created in God's Image, and that was AFTER Cain killed Abel. Genesis 5:1-2 It takes the AGREEMENT of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to Create a New Creature in Christ. Jesus said:

Jhn 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever;


Grandpa:>>The second Adam (Logos) was created on the 6th day.

The Word is Jesus. Jesus is the "Logos", and He is from forever to forever since He is the only Begotton of the invisible Spirit of God. In Jesus, dwelleth ALL the fulness of the Godhead, Bodily. Jesus IS God physically, and since He is the Alpha and Omega, He was NOT created. Jesus is LORD.
He is the physical Image of the invisible Spirit of Love, who has been forever and will be forever Eternally.

BTW, The second Adam was the same old physical Adam being born again Spiritually, AFTER Cain killed Abel. Genesis 5:1-2 Like ALL people, Adam and Eve were "created in God's Image", or born again, by their Faith in Christ, so we can be confident that all Christians will meet our first physical father and mother in Heaven, thanks to Jesus.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

Assyrian:>>Thanks for restarting.


Originally Posted by Aman777

Dear Readers, Man was made from the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day as the following Scriptures confirm;

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

The above verse is speaking of the 3rd Day, the same Day the Earth was made. Genesis 1:9-10 shows that this happened on the 3rd Day.
​

Assyrian:>>It can't be referring to the third day because that describe the forming of earth the seas and green plants, but not the heavens. Genesis 2:4 says in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. The only day in Genesis 1 that has God making earth and heavens is Day 1, but that doesn't work because the earth was left formless, void and deep under water. Other day mention God working on the heavens or on the earth, but not both. The only alternative is that 'in the day' refers to the whole period of creation, not a single 24 hour day.

Dear Assyrian, True. The Hebrew word for Day is better understood as Age. Each Day is some 4.5 Billion years in length in man's time.

Assyrian:>>Of course there is also the obvious problem is that the third day in Genesis 1 is about creating plants, not people. God made people on the 6th day.

God:>>Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Aman:>>This verse is confirmation that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day for the plants GREW on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:12

Assyrian:>>Genesis 1 certainly describes God making plants on day three, but not man.

You just read it: Here it is again: God:>>Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth

God is describing a time after the Earth was made but BEFORE the plants grew. The plants grew on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:12 Genesis 2:4-7 is speaking of the 3rd Day.

Assyrian:>>And while the two creation accounts describe God making plants, the conditions described in the world without plants are completely different, in Genesis 2 we see a dry arid wilderness where plants could not grow because the was no rain and there was no man to till the ground.

It's exactly the same conditions we see at Genesis 1:9-10.

Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Gen 1:9¶And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry [land] appear: and it was so.
Gen 1:10 And God called the dry [land] Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that [it was] good.

There was a firmament into which water was brought into. It made a roaring and God called it Seas, which means a roaring, in Hebrew. It doesn't say the dry land was under water, as you keep claiming, but shows the Earth or ground was brought into the firmament after the water was inside. They were gathered together, and not dried out from being under water.

Assyrian:>>In Genesis 1 day three starts off with the world under water and God has to separate land from waters before he creates plants, a lack of rain has nothing to do with the lack of plants. The reason there were no plants is that the earth had been deep under water until that morning, there was no time for plants to grow even if it hadn't been under water, that and the fact plants simply hadn't been created yet. Once they were created they grew up and we see plants yielding seeds and trees bearing fruit, days before God made man.

Doesn't work since the plants GREW on the 3rd Day.

God:>>Genesis 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Aman:>>Conclusion: On the 3rd Day after the Earth was made, but BEFORE the plants grew and before rain, the LORD God formed man. If you don't agree, then show us another time when man was made.
​

Assyrian:>>Genesis 1 says God made man on the sixth day.

No it doesnt'. It says God "created" man in His Image on the 6th Day. Being created Spiritually is a much more important event than just being made. That's when the Trinity makes you alive Eternally.

Gen 2:8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Aman:>>The above is further confirmation that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day, since the Trees were made AFTER man. That's God's Truth confirmed by Scripture. Some teach that man was formed of the dust on the 6th Day. Wonder why?

Assyrian:>>What you have shown is that we need to find a way to reconcile the two creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2, because Genesis 2 describes God making man before he made plants and trees while Genesis 1 describes God making plants and trees three days before he made man. But we need to find a way to get the two creation account to fit that doesn't require rearranging the accounts to make them fit. Just because you can make some details fit together does not confirm your interpretation if you can only achieve this at the expense of what we are told throughout the rest of the text.

My view has NO conflicts with the rest of the text. In fact, it gives us concrete evidence that God told us the Truth 3k years ago.
God's Truth agrees in EVERY way with the Truth which Science has discovered and with the History mankind has recorded. That is why I call it God's Truth. It is True, Scriptually, Scientifically, and Historically.

It also destroys the silly notion that man was the last of the creatures made, and shows that man was the first. It destroys the false idea that we evolved our human intelligence from Nature, and shows we got it from Noah's grandsons. It explains How and When we changed from innocent animal intelligence to human intelligence SUDDENLY, 10k years ago, and have gone from Caves to the Moon and back in just 1% of the time since Lucy first walked on this Planet, after we inherited the human intelligence of Adam. It's exciting and it's God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman
__________________

 

[Assyrian]

Now that you have started in a new thread, any chance of learning how to use the quote button properly? Each section I answer I have to search through previous posts to see what was written by who and when. I doubt you will get many people willing to trawl through your posts to follow what you are trying to say.

Dear Assyrian, True. The Hebrew word for Day is better understood as Age. Each Day is some 4.5 Billion years in length in man's time.

You seem to have missed my point that to line up Gen 2:4 in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, with Genesis 1 'in the day' covers multiple days in Genesis 1 probably all six, because no individual day in Genesis 1 saw both the heavens and the earth being made, (apart from day 1 which you admit doesn't work). You can claim each day in Genesis 1 is 4.5 billion years but 'in the day' in Gen 2:4 would have to be longer.

You just read it: Here it is again: God:>>Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth

God is describing a time after the Earth was made but BEFORE the plants grew. The plants grew on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:12 Genesis 2:4-7 is speaking of the 3rd Day.

This is just confirming my point God made plants on the third day, but not man.

Assyrian:>>And while the two creation accounts describe God making plants, the conditions described in the world without plants are completely different, in Genesis 2 we see a dry arid wilderness where plants could not grow because the was no rain and there was no man to till the ground.

It's exactly the same conditions we see at Genesis 1:9-10.
Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Gen 1:9¶And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry [land] appear: and it was so.
Gen 1:10 And God called the dry [land] Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that [it was] good.
There was a firmament into which water was brought into. It made a roaring and God called it Seas, which means a roaring, in Hebrew. It doesn't say the dry land was under water, as you keep claiming, but shows the Earth or ground was brought into the firmament after the water was inside. They were gathered together, and not dried out from being under water.

Another weird idea of yours but it still doesn't help you. The reason plants didn't grow in Genesis 2 is still because there was no rain and no man to till the ground, which is completely different to Day 3 in Genesis 1.

Where does it say that the earth was brought into the firmament? Gen 1:9 And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear." And it was so.
10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.
If the earth was outside the firmament before the (where you get this idea I don't know) and the waters were inside the firmament weren't the waters already in one place? How can it say Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place? The simple meaning of the text is that the waters separated from the land and gathered together into the seas.

Assyrian:>>In Genesis 1 day three starts off with the world under water and God has to separate land from waters before he creates plants, a lack of rain has nothing to do with the lack of plants. The reason there were no plants is that the earth had been deep under water until that morning, there was no time for plants to grow even if it hadn't been under water, that and the fact plants simply hadn't been created yet. Once they were created they grew up and we see plants yielding seeds and trees bearing fruit, days before God made man.

Doesn't work since the plants GREW on the 3rd Day.

It doesn't help you to keep repeating that. You need to address the points I raise.

Assyrian:>>Genesis 1 says God made man on the sixth day.

No it doesnt'. It says God "created" man in His Image on the 6th Day. Being created Spiritually is a much more important event than just being made. That's when the Trinity makes you alive Eternally.

It say man was created and made on the sixth day. Gen 1:26 Then 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 birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. That is the first time man is mentioned in Genesis and it says it is when God made man. It tells us he made us in his own image and likeness, but it still tells us this is God making us. You may have you own personal take on Genesis and think God made man back on day three, though there is no mention of it in the account of day three, and you may think making man in him image is actually remaking man spiritually. You asked "show us another time when man was made" I showed you what it say in Genesis.

Assyrian:>>What you have shown is that we need to find a way to reconcile the two creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2, because Genesis 2 describes God making man before he made plants and trees while Genesis 1 describes God making plants and trees three days before he made man. But we need to find a way to get the two creation account to fit that doesn't require rearranging the accounts to make them fit. Just because you can make some details fit together does not confirm your interpretation if you can only achieve this at the expense of what we are told throughout the rest of the text.

My view has NO conflicts with the rest of the text.

So why can't you address all the conflicts I point out?

In fact, it gives us concrete evidence that God told us the Truth 3k years ago.
God's Truth agrees in EVERY way with the Truth which Science has discovered and with the History mankind has recorded. That is why I call it God's Truth. It is True, Scriptually, Scientifically, and Historically.

Your interpretation certainly doesn't agree with what we have discovered about evolution. But we see here the reason you cling so hard to your interpretation and refuse to deal with the conflicts and contradictions, you think your interpretation vindicates the truth of God's word. It is why other creationist find different ways to reconcile the two creation accounts and cling on to their schemes too. But God's word doesn't need our effort to vindicate it, and I would rather face each text and treat it with integrity even if I couldn't understand how to reconcile two, rather than distort the plain meaning of one text to make it fit another.

It also destroys the silly notion that man was the last of the creatures made, and shows that man was the first.

Yes I wonder where the writer of Genesis 1 got that silly idea.

It destroys the false idea that we evolved our human intelligence from Nature, and shows we got it from Noah's grandsons.

That is your spaceman idea? The bible doesn't say how God made us in his image and being moulded form dust is a common biblical metaphor that doesn't exclude God using normal biology. I see no reason to ignore what we learned from science about the evolution of intelligence, and no reason to believe in space travelling Arks.

It explains How and When we changed from innocent animal intelligence to human intelligence SUDDENLY, 10k years ago, and have gone from Caves to the Moon and back in just 1% of the time since Lucy first walked on this Planet, after we inherited the human intelligence of Adam. It's exciting and it's God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman

Not so much suddenly as an exponential growth going all the way back to Lucy and friends. It was very slow at first but skill in tool making slowly developed, other art forms developed painting, carving,making beads, we learned to sew and use cords and ropes. All of this showing a gradual increase in intelligence matching the gradual increase in brain size of the hominds living then. The development of agriculture meant more food was available,and there were more people who could devote themselves to developing skills and technologies, populations grew with the increase in food so you had even more people developing technologies. The increase in food facilitated trade and new ideas and technologies could spread too. With the invention of writing skills could be kept from dying out with passing generations, knowledge could be preserved and grow from one generation to the next. That is why our learning curve has grown so steeply in the last few thousand years, but it has been growing all along, since the time of Lucy and before.

 

[Aman777]

Now that you have started in a new thread, any chance of learning how to use the quote button properly? Each section I answer I have to search through previous posts to see what was written by who and when. I doubt you will get many people willing to trawl through your posts to follow what you are trying to say.

You seem to have missed my point that to line up Gen 2:4 in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, with Genesis 1 'in the day' covers multiple days in Genesis 1 probably all six, because no individual day in Genesis 1 saw both the heavens and the earth being made, (apart from day 1 which you admit doesn't work). You can claim each day in Genesis 1 is 4.5 billion years but 'in the day' in Gen 2:4 would have to be longer.

Dear Assyrian, The 3rd Day is the ONLY Day in which the Earth and other HeavenS (Plural), the present 2nd Heaven and the 3rd Heaven were made.

Day 2 is when the 1st heaven was made and Day 3 is when the 2nd and 3rd Heavens were made.

Assyrian:
This is just confirming my point God made plants on the third day, but not man.

Assyrian:>>Another weird idea of yours but it still doesn't help you. The reason plants didn't grow in Genesis 2 is still because there was no rain and no man to till the ground, which is completely different to Day 3 in Genesis 1.

No, it isn't. Man was made after the earth but BEFORE the plants grew, Genesis 2 tells us. Then AFTER man is made, the LORD plants the Garden and places the man in it. Genesis 2:8-9 Also, the plants GREW on the 3rd Day in Genesis 1:12.

Assyrian:>>Where does it say that the earth was brought into the firmament? Gen 1:9 And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear." And it was so.

Remember that the firmament was made and placed in the midst of the water on Day 2. The LORD brought water into the firmament and then added dry land.

10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

Assyrian:>>
If the earth was outside the firmament before the (where you get this idea I don't know) and the waters were inside the firmament weren't the waters already in one place? How can it say Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place? The simple meaning of the text is that the waters separated from the land and gathered together into the seas.

Remember that in the beginning, God made the heaven (air) and the earth (ground). The ground and the water were outside the firmament or boundary of the first heaven, before the LORD put them inside the firmament.

Assyrian:>>
It doesn't help you to keep repeating that. You need to address the points I raise.

It say man was created and made on the sixth day. Gen 1:26 Then 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 birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. That is the first time man is mentioned in Genesis and it says it is when God made man.

Notice God created THEM, which is both Adam and Eve, in His own Image.

Assyrian:>>
It tells us he made us in his own image and likeness, but it still tells us this is God making us. You may have you own personal take on Genesis and think God made man back on day three, though there is no mention of it in the account of day three, and you may think making man in him image is actually remaking man spiritually. You asked "show us another time when man was made" I showed you what it say in Genesis.

Eve could NOT have been created in God's Image on the 3rd Day since she was not made until the 6th Day. Gen. 2:22 It's your time to explain WHY Adam was NOT made Spiritually on the 3rd Day, but was only made physically. It's because in order to be born Eternally, it takes the agreement fo the Trinity to create a new Christian. Thus, my point that Adam and Eve were born again, and He called THEIR name Adam, in the Day they were created.

So why can't you adress the conflicts I point out?

I just did. Now, it's your time to address your misunderstanding.

Assyrian:>
Your interpretation certainly doesn't agree with what we have discovered about evolution. But we see here the reason you cling so hard to your interpretation and refuse to deal with the conflicts and contradictions, you think your interpretation vindicates the truth of God's word. It is why other creationist find different ways to reconcile the two creation accounts and cling on to their schemes too. But God's word doesn't need our effort to vindicate it, and I would rather face each text and treat it with integrity even if I couldn't understand how to reconcile two, rather than distort the plain meaning of one text to make it fit another.

I haven't done that and my view does agree with Evolution. Genesis 6:4 shows that we changed or evolved into humans, with the higher intelligence of Adam, when the sons of God (Prehistoric man) married and produced children with Adam's descendants. This happened on our Planet when Noah's grandsons, like Cain, had NO other humans to marry. They married and produced the Humans of today with the prehistoric people who were here when Noah arrived. Human civilization can be traced all the way back to the Ark.

Assyrian:>>
Yes, wonder where the writer of Genesis 1 got that silly idea.

I have no idea what you are responding to since you insist I post this way.

Assyrian:>>
That is your spaceman idea? The bible doesn't say how God made us in his image and being moulded form dust is a common biblical metaphor that doesn't exclude God using normal biology. I see no reason to ignore what we learned from science about the evolution of intelligence, and no reason to believe in space travelling Arks.

I haven't claimed that the Ark was a Space ship since it was NOT protected from the Vacuum of Space. The Ark was in the firmament, which was in the water, and when the windows on high were opened, the firmament filled with water and sank in 40 days. This brought the Ark and it's human inhabitants into our present 2nd Heaven. NO Space ship needed.

Assyrian:>>
Not so much suddenly as an exponential growth going all the way back to Lucy and friends. It was very slow at first but skill in tool making slowly developed, other art forms developed painting, carving,making beads, we learned to sew and use cords and ropes. All of this showing a gradual increase in intelligence matching the gradual increase in brain size of the hominds living then. The development of agriculture meant more food was available,and there were more people who could devote themselves to developing skills and technologies, populations grew with the increase in food so you had even more people developing technologies. The increase in food facilitated trade and new ideas and technologies could spread too. With the invention of writing skills could be kept from dying out with passing generations, knowledge could be preserved and grow from one generation to the next. That is why our learning curve has grown so steeply in the last few thousand years, but it has been growing all along, since the time of Lucy and before.

For 99% of the time since Lucy walked on our Earth, we did NOT become humans, while on the first Earth, Adam had agriculture with NO evolution and Cain built a city, and Cain's descendants had high technology with little evolution. Genesis 4

This is Scriptural evidence that long periods of time and many mutations does NOT produce Human intelligenvce in Apes. Adam has an intelligence like God's (Gen. 3:22) but NO creature which evolved from the water has the Ability to know good and evil as Adam did.

That's God's Truth about How and When we evolved our human intelligence from people whose origin was in the dust of the ground on the 1st Heaven, and NOT our's. It is the Achielles Heel of the Theory of Evolution since Science cannot show HOW or WHEN we changed from animal to human intelligence. In Fact, Science is STILL ignorant of the difference between Human and animal intelligence TODAY.

Your claim is that it took some 4 Million years for Apes to become humans, but God shows it takes but One Generation for prehistoric people to evolve into humans with the Human intelligence of Adam, the first Human. God's Truth is the Truth in every way, including evolution.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Assyrian]

I said you should learn how to use the quote button properly.

 

[Aman777]

Assyrian:>>I said you should learn how to use the quote button properly.

Dear Assyrian, I did the best I could. Why don't you tell everyone how to use it? I haven't seen any instructions. Perhaps you could tell us all how to use it.

In Love,
Aman

 

[granpa]

BBCode - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Assyrian]

Assyrian:>>I said you should learn how to use the quote button properly.

Dear Assyrian, I did the best I could. Why don't you tell everyone how to use it? I haven't seen any instructions. Perhaps you could tell us all how to use it.

In Love,
Aman

I did try to explain it to you before Anyway here goes:

Any block of text you are quoting needs to start with [ quote ] and end with [ /quote ]
I have thrown in spaces inside the brackets to stop the c.f software reading as quote and end quote tags. You need them without spaces.

If you press the quote button at the bottom of a post, your reply will have what they wrote in their post enclosed in [ quote=JoeBloggs ] and [ /quote ] If you are replying to individual sections of their reply you will have to make sure the first block of their reply ends in a [ /quote ] - again, type t without spaces.

The next section you want to quote is easier. You just highlight the text and press the

button. Do that all the way down, with every section of text you want to quote until you get to the last part. That will already have a [ /quote ] you just need to start it with [ quote ]

Before you post, press the Preview Post button beside the Submit Reply to check your quotes work.

When you have a bit more experience you can even try nesting quotes:
[ quote ][ quote ]Your earlier point...[ /quote ]JoeBlogg's reply...[ /quote ]

Your earlier point...

JoeBlogg's reply...

or even:
[ quote ][ quote ][ quote ]JoeBloggs' point...[ /quote]Your response...[ /quote ]JoeBlogg's response...[ /quote ]

JoeBloggs' point...

Your response...

JoeBlogg's reply...

 

[Aman777]

Assyrian:>>I did try to explain it to you before Anyway here goes:

Any block of text you are quoting needs to start with [ quote ] and end with [ /quote ]
I have thrown in spaces inside the brackets to stop the c.f software reading as quote and end quote tags. You need them without spaces.

If you press the quote button at the bottom of a post, your reply will have what they wrote in their post enclosed in [ quote=JoeBloggs ] and [ /quote ] If you are replying to individual sections of their reply you will have to make sure the first block of their reply ends in a [ /quote ] - again, type t without spaces.

The next section you want to quote is easier. You just highlight the text and press the

button. Do that all the way down, with every section of text you want to quote until you get to the last part. That will already have a [ /quote ] you just need to start it with [ quote ]

Before you post, press the Preview Post button beside the Submit Reply to check your quotes work.

When you have a bit more experience you can even try nesting quotes:
[ quote ][ quote ]Your earlier point...[ /quote ]JoeBlogg's reply...[ /quote ]

Your earlier point...
​

JoeBlogg's reply...
​

or even:
[ quote ][ quote ][ quote ]JoeBloggs' point...[ /quote]Your response...[ /quote ]JoeBlogg's response...[ /quote ]

JoeBloggs' point...
​

Your response...
​

JoeBlogg's reply...
​

__________________

Dear Assyrian, I tried it and it didn't work for me. Please forgive my ignorance but I suppose I will have to stay with my dumb old way. BTW, Have you understood that Adam was made the 3rd Day yet? BTW, thanks for putting the Ammorites in the center. It allows me to center my text.​

In Love,
Aman​

 

[SkyWriting]

Dear Readers, Man was made from the dust of the ground on th..

No matter....

 

[Aman777]

Originally Posted by Aman777

Aman:>>Dear Readers, Man was made from the dust of the ground on third Day.
​

Sky:>>No matter....

Dear Sky, It matters a great deal to those of us who seek to find the Truth of the Creation. Some religionists claim that we must have evolved from other animals who lived long before us. Not so. Scripture clearly tells us that man was formed from the dust of the Ground on the 3rd Day, in total contradiction of the false preaching of the religionists. Scripture shows that Humans were made FIRST, before any other living creature.

IF you know anything about Scripture, you know the importance of being first and NOT last. Humans were FIRST because our destiny is to have dominion over every other living creature in Heaven. We did NOT come from the water, as the bones of ancient man show, but we came from a Special Creation of mankind by the hands of Jesus on another world, which was destroyed in the Flood.

That's God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Assyrian]

Dear Assyrian, I tried it and it didn't work for me. Please forgive my ignorance but I suppose I will have to stay with my dumb old way. BTW, Have you understood that Adam was made the 3rd Day yet? BTW, thanks for putting the Ammorites in the center. It allows me to center my text.​

In Love,
Aman​

Keep trying. You'll get it.

 

[Assyrian]

Meanwhile here is a reply to post 8.

You seem to have missed my point that to line up Gen 2:4 in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, with Genesis 1 'in the day' covers multiple days in Genesis 1 probably all six, because no individual day in Genesis 1 saw both the heavens and the earth being made, (apart from day 1 which you admit doesn't work). You can claim each day in Genesis 1 is 4.5 billion years but 'in the day' in Gen 2:4 would have to be longer.

Dear Assyrian, The 3rd Day is the ONLY Day in which the Earth and other HeavenS (Plural), the present 2nd Heaven and the 3rd Heaven were made.

Day 2 is when the 1st heaven was made and Day 3 is when the 2nd and 3rd Heavens were made.

Sorry, you haven't addressed my point. Genesis 2:4 talks about the day God made the earth and the heavens. Which day in Genesis 1 is that supposed to be? You say it can't be day one, what other day did God make both both earth and heavens? If you think God made the heavens on the 3rd day, show it from the text.

Incidentally, every time the AV talks about heaven or heavens on the OT, it is the same plural Hebrew word shamayim. You cannot base an interpretation on the stylistic choice of an AV translator to interpret shamayim as heaven or heavens.

The reason plants didn't grow in Genesis 2 is still because there was no rain and no man to till the ground, which is completely different to Day 3 in Genesis 1.

No, it isn't. Man was made after the earth but BEFORE the plants grew, Genesis 2 tells us. Then AFTER man is made, the LORD plants the Garden and places the man in it. Genesis 2:8-9 Also, the plants GREW on the 3rd Day in Genesis 1:12.

Saying what happened in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, does not address my question about why there were no plants at the beginning of each passage. Genesis 2 tell us the reason there were no plants, and it simply does not fit day three in Genesis 1.

I have asked you this many times and you simply cannot answer.

Remember that the firmament was made and placed in the midst of the water on Day 2. The LORD brought water into the firmament and then added dry land.

10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

Where does it say land was added?

Remember that in the beginning, God made the heaven (air) and the earth (ground). The ground and the water were outside the firmament or boundary of the first heaven, before the LORD put them inside the firmament.

It doesn't say the ground and water were outside the firmament.

Notice God created THEM, which is both Adam and Eve, in His own Image.

Adam and Eve, or human men and women. It is worth pointing out that 'Adam' is used both for the individual described in Genesis two and it is God's name for people male and female, in Gen 5:2 He created them male and female, and blessed them, and called their name “Adam,” in the day when they were created. Not sure how that helps you point.

Eve could NOT have been created in God's Image on the 3rd Day since she was not made until the 6th Day. Gen. 2:22 It's your time to explain WHY Adam was NOT made Spiritually on the 3rd Day, but was only made physically. It's because in order to be born Eternally, it takes the agreement fo the Trinity to create a new Christian. Thus, my point that Adam and Eve were born again, and He called THEIR name Adam, in the Day they were created.

Not sure why you think I need to explain about how Adam was made on the third day, that is your idea. The human spirit is simply not mentioned in the Genesis creation accounts. The nearest you have is the reference in Genesis 2:7 the LORD God ...breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.

So why can't you address the conflicts I point out?

I just did. Now, it's your time to address your misunderstanding.

You said nothing about the reason there were no plants in Genesis 1.

I haven't done that and my view does agree with Evolution. Genesis 6:4 shows that we changed or evolved into humans, with the higher intelligence of Adam, when the sons of God (Prehistoric man) married and produced children with Adam's descendants. This happened on our Planet when Noah's grandsons, like Cain, had NO other humans to marry. They married and produced the Humans of today with the prehistoric people who were here when Noah arrived. Human civilization can be traced all the way back to the Ark.

Sorry evolution say nothing about hominids hybridising with the occupants of an interplanetary Ark. Evolution shows us that modern humans evolved in Africa from earlier hominids, and that the ones who migrated out of Africa interbred with earlier migrants out of Africa like Neanderthals and Denisovans. Of course you don't need Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA to be intelligent.

Yes, wonder where the writer of Genesis 1 got that silly idea.

I have no idea what you are responding to since you insist I post this way.

You only have to read my post. The point I was responding to was quoted right above my response. I have highlighted the relevant phrase in bold:

| It also destroys the silly notion that man was the last of the creatures made, and shows that man was the first.
​

Yes I wonder where the writer of Genesis 1 got that silly idea.​

I haven't claimed that the Ark was a Space ship since it was NOT protected from the Vacuum of Space. The Ark was in the firmament, which was in the water, and when the windows on high were opened, the firmament filled with water and sank in 40 days. This brought the Ark and it's human inhabitants into our present 2nd Heaven. NO Space ship needed.

No you just have them travelling from one planet to another, without any vacuum in between. Maybe the Carpenters had the right idea, lets call the Ark an 'interplanetary craft'.

For 99% of the time since Lucy walked on our Earth, we did NOT become humans, while on the first Earth, Adam had agriculture with NO evolution and Cain built a city, and Cain's descendants had high technology with little evolution. Genesis 4

Sorry you didn't address the evidence for a gradal increase in intelligence between the time of Lucy and the early Homo sapiens. I have told you before, simply restating you beliefs is not the same as addressing the problems I have point out.

This is Scriptural evidence that long periods of time and many mutations does NOT produce Human intelligenvce in Apes. Adam has an intelligence like God's (Gen. 3:22) but NO creature which evolved from the water has the Ability to know good and evil as Adam did.

You are assuming God did not use evolution. As I have pointed out the Potter making people from clay is a common biblical metaphor. Don't mistake your interpretation of making Adam from clay and you views of hybridisation with interplanetary travellers for conclusive scriptural evidence.

That's God's Truth about How and When we evolved our human intelligence from people whose origin was in the dust of the ground on the 1st Heaven, and NOT our's. It is the Achielles Heel of the Theory of Evolution since Science cannot show HOW or WHEN we changed from animal to human intelligence. In Fact, Science is STILL ignorant of the difference between Human and animal intelligence TODAY.

Actually science has learned a lot about the evolution of intelligence and similarities between human intelligence and the intelligence in other animals. Of course you reject all this science too. Which is you prerogative, only don't go claiming that you accept science and that science agrees with you interpretation of scripture.

Your claim is that it took some 4 Million years for Apes to become humans, but God shows it takes but One Generation for prehistoric people to evolve into humans with the Human intelligence of Adam, the first Human. God's Truth is the Truth in every way, including evolution.

Sorry the bible doesn't talk of prehistoric people evolving human intelligence in one generation.

It is great that you can search scriptures and come up with your own interpretation of Genesis. But you really need to distinguish between your own interpretation of the text and what the text actually says. Until you can step back and examine your own interpretation, 1Thess 5:21 test everything; hold fast what is good, you won't be able to grow in your understanding of God's word.

 

[Aman777]

Meanwhile here is a reply to post 8.


Sorry, you haven't addressed my point. Genesis 2:4 talks about the day God made the earth and the heavens. Which day in Genesis 1 is that supposed to be? You say it can't be day one, what other day did God make both both earth and heavens? If you think God made the heavens on the 3rd day, show it from the text.

Dear Assyrian, Sure.

Gen 2:4¶ These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

As you should be able to see. The LORD God (Jesus) made the first Earth and the other HeavenS (Plural) on the 3rd Day, the SAME Day Genesis 1:9-10 tells us the Earth and the plants were made.

Assyrian:>>Incidentally, every time the AV talks about heaven or heavens on the OT, it is the same plural Hebrew word shamayim. You cannot base an interpretation on the stylistic choice of an AV translator to interpret shamayim as heaven or heavens.

Saying what happened in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, does not address my question about why there were no plants at the beginning of each passage. Genesis 2 tell us the reason there were no plants, and it simply does not fit day three in Genesis 1.

Sure it does. Genesis 2:4-8 specifically identifies the Day in which these events happened. It was the 3rd Day AFTER the Earth was made, but BEFORE the plants grew.

Genesis 1 shows a world, a firmament, placed in the middle of water. Genesis 1:9 shows that God moves water from under the firmament into the firmament. Then He brings in dry land. The dry land was empty, void of life and separate from the water.

Gen 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth;

Genesis 1:10 shows that God calls the dry land, Earth, and the next item on the agenda is to bring forth Plants. Before the plants grow, Genesis 2:4-8 adds information to this time and shows that this is the time when man was formed of the dust of the ground.

Genesis 1:12 shows that the plants GREW on the 3rd Day.


Assyrian:>>I have asked you this many times and you simply cannot answer.

Where does it say land was added?

Genesis 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

Genesis 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth;


Assyrian:>>It doesn't say the ground and water were outside the firmament.

Read closer. The firmament contained air since God called it "heaven" in Genesis 1:8 It was in the middle or midst of water and water was above and below it, indicating that it was Floating.

God took some water from below the firmament and put it into the firmament and it made a roaring noise, so God called the roaring "Seas", since the Hebrew word fo Seas is a roaring. Now, the firmament had water inside it and outside it. God added "dry ground" and called it Earth. It was the world of Adam. Peter tells us it was in the water and out of the water. ll Peter 3:5

Assyrian:>>Adam and Eve, or human men and women. It is worth pointing out that 'Adam' is used both for the individual described in Genesis two and it is God's name for people male and female, in Gen 5:2 He created them male and female, and blessed them, and called their name “Adam,” in the day when they were created. Not sure how that helps you point.

It simply means that God called both A & E, Adam, in the Day they were created. As you know it means mankind and I think that's the point. Eve was made in the Image of Jesus Spiritually.

Assyrian:>>Not sure why you think I need to explain about how Adam was made on the third day, that is your idea. The human spirit is simply not mentioned in the Genesis creation accounts. The nearest you have is the reference in Genesis 2:7 the LORD God ...breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.

It reveals HOW Jesus gave temporary life to the creatures He made from the dust of the ground. He didn't make them alive Spiritually because ONLY the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can made a New Person in Christ. God said, Let US make man in OUR Image.

Assyrian:>>You said nothing about the reason there were no plants in Genesis 1.

All the plants were made AFTER the first Earth was made on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:12 and Genesis 2:8 shows that this was AFTER man was made.

Assyrian:>>Sorry evolution say nothing about hominids hybridising with the occupants of an interplanetary Ark. Evolution shows us that modern humans evolved in Africa from earlier hominids, and that the ones who migrated out of Africa interbred with earlier migrants out of Africa like Neanderthals and Denisovans. Of course you don't need Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA to be intelligent.

I agree. The only way to become Human is to inherit the higher intelligence of Adam. Today's Evolution cannot tell us HOW Or WHEN we evolved from animal to human intelligence because it hasn't learned How to tell the difference between animal and human intelligence, today.

Assyrian:>>You only have to read my post. The point I was responding to was quoted right above my response. I have highlighted the relevant phrase in bold:

Aman:>>| It also destroys the silly notion that man was the last of the creatures made, and shows that man was the first.

​

Assyrian:>>Yes I wonder where the writer of Genesis 1 got that silly idea.



The writer of Scripture is God. He knew what Day man was made BEFORE He began His Creation. If it didn't, He wouldn't be God. The problem with being the Supreme intelligence of Creation is to communicate this to mortal people.
​

Assyrian:>>No you just have them travelling from one planet to another, without any vacuum in between. Maybe the Carpenters had the right idea, lets call the Ark an 'interplanetary craft'.

Not if the first world were much smaller than our's and was in the water and out of the water, floating in the waters of Lake Van, in the mountains of Ararat.

Assyrian:>>Sorry you didn't address the evidence for a gradal increase in intelligence between the time of Lucy and the early Homo sapiens. I have told you before, simply restating you beliefs is not the same as addressing the problems I have point out.

The increase in intelligence is obvious. The sons of God (Prehistoric man) was no dummy....BUT....neither was Adam. Adding the higher intelligence level of Adam to the descendants of Mitochondrial Eve produces today's humans. It's nothing new. It happened on the first Earth when Cain's descendants had smelting, musical instrument building, city building and high technology which ONLY humans have. Might I add, with little or No Evolution. Read Genesis 4 and try to make that fit with your ideas.

Assyrian:>>You are assuming God did not use evolution. As I have pointed out the Potter making people from clay is a common biblical metaphor. Don't mistake your interpretation of making Adam from clay and you views of hybridisation with interplanetary travellers for conclusive scriptural evidence.

I'm the only person I know who shows that Scripture supports Evolution, which I prefer to call Adaptation. Genesis 6:4 shows that the sons of God (Prehistoric man) married and produced children, mighty men, men of reknown, and Giants intellectually. These offsrping were Humans. Only the descedants of Adam are human.

Assyrian:>>Actually science has learned a lot about the evolution of intelligence and similarities between human intelligence and the intelligence in other animals. Of course you reject all this science too. Which is you prerogative, only don't go claiming that you accept science and that science agrees with you interpretation of scripture.

I accept Factual Science but I find problems with the false assumptions of some of today's scientists. My main problem with the TOE is that it falsely assumes we evolved our human intelligence over long periods of time. I show that this false Theory is wrong by showing that since Lucy walked this Earth, that in less than 1% of that time have we grown our own food.

We began to farm just South of the mountains of Ararat, and there you will find the FIRST human cities on this Planet, shown in Scripture to be built by one of Noah's great grandchildren. His name is Nimrod and he is the FIRST generation of Humans to inhabit our world. He is the product of Noah's grandson, who had NO other human to marry, and a prehistoric woman, whose origin was in the water on the 5th Day.

Assyrian:>>Sorry the bible doesn't talk of prehistoric people evolving human intelligence in one generation.

Count it for yourself. Noah's grandson, like Cain, had NO other human to marry. He married a woman whose origin was in the water on the 5th Day. The offsping of that union was Noah's great grandson, Nimrod. He is the combination of the descendants of Adam AND the descendants of Mitochondrial Eve, on our Earth. The proof? Today, ALL Humans on this Planet are the same as Nimrod.

Assyrian:>>It is great that you can search scriptures and come up with your own interpretation of Genesis.


I didn't do that. I read it for what it said, instead of listening to the obviously confused people who told me to just accept it by faith in their views. I knew it was God's Truth when it agreed with every other discovered Truth of mankind.


Assyrian:>>But you really need to distinguish between your own interpretation of the text and what the text actually says. Until you can step back and examine your own interpretation, 1Thess 5:21 test everything; hold fast what is good, you won't be able to grow in your understanding of God's word.

I've grown enough. My problem now is to get people who are stuck in their own views to actually read it for themselves. Some are as confused as you seem to be, and cannot refute my views Scripturally, so they imply that it can't be the Truth. It couldn't be, because they haven't seen it before, they tell themselves.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

Gen 2:4¶ These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

Aman:>>As you should be able to see. The LORD God (Jesus) made the first Earth and the other HeavenS (Plural) on the 3rd Day, the SAME Day Genesis 1:9-10 tells us the Earth and the plants were made.

Assyrian:>>Incidentally, every time the AV talks about heaven or heavens on the OT, it is the same plural Hebrew word shamayim. You cannot base an interpretation on the stylistic choice of an AV translator to interpret shamayim as heaven or heavens.

Dear Assyrian, Good point. My view was influenced by the Scriptural Fact that Scripture speaks of THREE Heavens.

The first Heaven was in the midst of water and later destroyed in a Flood.
The second Heaven is our world, which is scheduled to be burned.
The thrid Heaven is the object of the Creation, contains a single city with streets of gold and gates of pearl, and it will never die.

The first heaven was made the SECOND Day. Genesis 1:6-8
The second heaven was made the THIRD Day. Genesis 2:4
The third heaven was made the THIRD Day. Genesis 2:4

See why I see the Plural version of Shamayim in Genesis 2:4?

In Love,
Aman

 

[Assyrian]

Remember Aman, each quote from me should be wrapped in quote tags,

and

Instead of adding in 'Assyrian:>>' before each section you want to respond to, i.e.

Assyrian:>>It is great that you can...

Use quote tags instead:

It is great that you can...

Dear Assyrian, Good point. My view was influenced by the Scriptural Fact that Scripture speaks of THREE Heavens.

The first Heaven was in the midst of water and later destroyed in a Flood.
The second Heaven is our world, which is scheduled to be burned.
The thrid Heaven is the object of the Creation, contains a single city with streets of gold and gates of pearl, and it will never die.

The first heaven was made the SECOND Day. Genesis 1:6-8
The second heaven was made the THIRD Day. Genesis 2:4
The third heaven was made the THIRD Day. Genesis 2:4

See why I see the Plural version of Shamayim in Genesis 2:4?

In Love,
Aman

Yes I know the passage about the third heaven. You are making a number of assumptions though. First you are assuming there are only three, but we won't get into that Then you are assuming that they are numbered chronologically rather than spatially. If the third heaven really is the 'highest heaven' the bible speaks about, then maybe it is called the third heaven because it is highest.

Then there is the problem with your identification of first, second and third heavens with the heavens mentioned in Genesis 1&2 when Genesis doesn't number them. Why is the first heaven made on the second day, when we are told God created the heavens and the earth in Gen 1:1? There is a reference to God making the firmament can calling it the heavens on day two, but no mention of creating a heaven or even two heavens on day three.

There is no mention of the firmament, the heavens God created on day two, being destroyed in the flood. Psalm 19:1 A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows his handywork. Apparently the firmament was alive and well in David's day. I don't know where you get the idea that the second heaven is our world either. I suspect your reference to it being burned means you got it from 2Peter 3, but Peter doesn't say the second heaven is our world in fact when he talk of the heavens being burnt he distinguished between the heavens and the earth.

Gen 2:4¶ These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

As you should be able to see. The LORD God (Jesus) made the first Earth and the other HeavenS (Plural) on the 3rd Day, the SAME Day Genesis 1:9-10 tells us the Earth and the plants were made.

Where does Genesis 1 say God made the heavens on the third day? Or have you added that into the text the same way you add in making Adam on the third day?

Saying what happened in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, does not address my question about why there were no plants at the beginning of each passage. Genesis 2 tell us the reason there were no plants, and it simply does not fit day three in Genesis 1.

Sure it does. Genesis 2:4-8 specifically identifies the Day in which these events happened. It was the 3rd Day AFTER the Earth was made, but BEFORE the plants grew.

Genesis 1 shows a world, a firmament, placed in the middle of water. Genesis 1:9 shows that God moves water from under the firmament into the firmament. Then He brings in dry land. The dry land was empty, void of life and separate from the water.

Gen 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth;

Genesis 1:10 shows that God calls the dry land, Earth, and the next item on the agenda is to bring forth Plants. Before the plants grow, Genesis 2:4-8 adds information to this time and shows that this is the time when man was formed of the dust of the ground.

Genesis 1:12 shows that the plants GREW on the 3rd Day.

I really don't know if this is a comprehension problem with you or not. You are still talking about what happened and when, but you are completely failing to address the issue of why or why not. Genesis 2 tells us why there were no plants in Gen 2:5. You haven't yet answered how this explanation fits the plant free world of Gen 1:10.

Genesis 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

Genesis 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth;

Sorry, there is nothing about land being added there.

The word used for appear is ra'ah to see, but it in the niphal, which is the Hebrew passive, in other words it means be seen or be visible. Most translates go with 'appear' which has that meaning too, but here are some other translations of the verse.
(BBE) And God said, Let the waters under the heaven come together in one place, and let the dry land be seen: and it was so.
(Great Bible 1539) And God sayde: let the waters vnder heauen be gathered together into one place, that the drye lande maye be sene. And so it came to passe.
(Leeser) And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land be visible: and it was so.
(Youngs) And God saith, `Let the waters under the heavens be collected unto one place, and let the dry land be seen:' and it is so.

To be continued...