Man made on 3rd Day

[Assyrian]

This person is promoting his strange theology very hard. Unfortunately that he should realize that he probably can not find the second person, past, now and in the future, who would agree with him,

When he insisted on something which not a second person would agree, I think he really should wake up.

Thanks Juv

 

[juvenissun]

Thanks Juv

Happy summer.

 

[Aman777]

Aman:>>Am I wrong? or are the TEs here Bible believers? or are they Evols first and Christians later?

Juv:>>No hostility. The idea that Adam was made on Day 3 is simply wrong.

Dear Juv, No hostility meant, but you seem to know more than God who told us in Genesis 2:4-7 that man was formed of the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day AFTER the Earth was made but BEFORE the plants grew. You sound like a wounded Evol to me. I hate it about your Theory of Evolution being refuted by God, but now it's time to make up another one.

Juv:>>I still like to see a website or a webpage which at least support your idea. I think it would be very hard to find.

I could give you a link to my book, but that is probably against the rules of this board. What you are asking for sounds like you give more credibility to man's theories than to God. That reminds me of what God tells us.

2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Shall we discuss the Fable of Evolution which falsely teaches that man was the last of the creatures made? instead of the first? I challenge you to a Scriptural debate but you seem ill prepared. Maybe you could go out to the people who are falsely teaching that man was the last creature made, and find someone with a little more knowledge than you have.

Either show us where man was formed of the dust of the ground on another Day, except the 3rd, or everyone will see that you have nothing to offer but your own UnScriptural personal opinion. Your personal opinion is worth something for that and $1 will get you a cup of coffee at McDs.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

I'm pretty sure he's the only person on earth who actually believes this.

Dear Cal, Can you refute me Scripturally? I don't think so. Can you refue me Scientifically? No. Can you refute me Historically? No. It matters not how many people believe God and His Holy Word and put God's Truth on a higher level than mortal man's changable Science, which is always subject to be corrected.

I keep waiting for just ONE of my critics here to offer a Scriptural rebuke, but none of you seem capable. It will only get worse for your positions as this debate continues. Better jump on board now, before you're left behind, hanging on the views of ancient men, whose views cannot be supported by Scripture....nor anything else.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Assyrian]

...continued

Assyrian:>>The description of the day, does not fit day three which only describes the earth being created, not the heavens.

It is ADDING information. One of the additional bits is that God also made other heavens on the 3rd Day. You can't find it in Genesis 1 because it is ADDDING information to the events of the 3rd Day NOT told about in Genesis one.

No, you are mixing up the additional bits of information with the description of when the added information is talking about. In the day God created the heavens and the earth, tells you when. If it is talking about Genesis 1, you need to find a day that matches that description.

Assyrian:<<There are better day to fit that description, day 1, or from Gen 2:1, the whole of Genesis 1 being described as a day. Day three doesn't fit the description and I have already shown you that day three doesn't work because the reasons for there not being any plants in Genesis 2 simply don't fit day three in Genesis 2. You haven't been able to address that.

Correction: You have been unable to understand. It's probably because it goes against your religion. The plants were NOT made until AFTER man was made. Genesis 2:8-9 destroys your silly notion that the plants were made before man, by showing you the Garden was planted AFTER the man was made.

What has my 'religion' got to do with you being unable to fit the reason there were no plants in Gen 2 with the reason there were no plants in Gen 1? I agree plants were not made until after man was made in Genesis 2, however in Genesis 1, plants were made before man was made. That is why I think the stories are figurative, there is no problem with completely different orders of creation. Much better than your approach which has to rewrite Genesis 1 and still can't make the explanation about the lack of plants in Genesis 2 fit day three where you want to squeeze it in.

Aman:>>False accusation. Go back and see which one of us is using Scripture to support their views and which one of us is having a terrible time understanding the most simple of things. ie. the 3rd Day I have NO problem supporting my views Scripturally,

I don't see how claiming you support you ideas scripturally helps you with the problems I have pointed out with your numbering system for the heavens.

Assyrian:>>I have no problem understanding you claims about Gen 2:4 and the third day, I just recognise the problems trying to make those two passages fit together. But no only do you force those two passages together, you draw conclusions from that interpretation that you cannot justify from scripture either and build a whole framework of speculation around this idea about bowl shaped firmaments and multiple earths, you arbitratily pick and choose which heavens mention in Genesis are real heavens and which to dismiss as real heavens on the basis of alchemical ideas of elements you read into Genesis.

More False Accusations. In trying to bring things down to the lowest level, I sometimes say, Picture the first world as a Giant Snow Globe. You take that statement and change it into some UFO conspiracy plot and claim that I am overreaching.

If you are going to claim I make false accusations, you should try to refute what I said.

I didn't write Genesis 1:6-8 which tells us the first heaven was made the second day.

Genesis 1:6-8 says God created a firmament which he called the heavens, it doesn't say he created the first heavens on the second day.

I didn't write Genesis 2:4 which tells us other heavens were made the third Day. I just read about it and told you. Because it doesn't fit with your religion, you attack, thus making it harder for you to understand.

It is true you didn't write Genesis 2:4 either, all the more reason you should distinguish between what it actually says and what you think it means. It does talk of a day the heavens were created. It does say they were the other heavens and it doesn't say it was the third day.

Assyrian:>>You confuse earth and world and firmament and claim firmaments were destroyed in the flood without any scriptures to back it up that refer to the flood and talk about a firmament being destroyed. Then you think because it fits this vast scheme you have thought up, it must be scriptural. I have shown you what scripture says, yet you haven't been able to provide scriptural justification for any of the ideas I have challenged you on.

Of course not. It doesn't fit with your religion of changing God's Holy Word into fables, allegory, and fiction. It destroys your beloved TOE, and shows you prophecy of what will happen to those views at the end of time. You don't like my view because it IS Scriptural, and your's is not.

Instead of just claiming your views are scriptural adn attributing my argument to my 'religion', why not address the point I make? It might even help you distinguish between your own ideas and what is actually in scripture.

Not me. I can see several ways in which to understand a passage. That is WHY I look for the Truth Scripturally, Historically, and Scientifically, to find the agreement of these Truths. I don't accept modernist, liberal, make up your own Bible, know it all, Evol fantasies.

I notice you miss out on parables, metaphors and symbols, even though I have shown you that God loves to speak to us that way, you dismiss the Father's voice as modernist, liberal, make up your own Bible, know it all, fantasies. What sort of bondage produce such fear of the voice of God in the hearts of literalists?

Assyrian:>>You still haven't explained the scriptural basis for the numbers you attach to the different heavens.

Since Genesis 1:6-8 tells me God made the 1st Heaven on the 2nd Day and Genesis 2:4 tells me He made other HeavenS on the 3rd Day, and God tells me ALL the way through Scripture that He totally and completely destroyed the 1st Heaven, and that He is going to burn the present world, I look forward to the 3rd Heaven, wherein dwelleth righteousness. I hope He made a Zillion and I can hardly wait to find out.

So the only basis your numbering system are things (highlighted in blue) you think scripture says, but it doesn't actually say at all? Doesn't that concern you? Isn't it a problem that you cannot tell the difference between scripture and what you read into it?

It seems the whole Bible is a mystery to you. Where do you think Jesus has gone to prepare a place for us? Where is New Jerusalem? The 3rd Heaven is the object of the Creation. The entire History of it's Creation is told in Genesis Chapter 1. I am sorry it's such a mystery to you.

If the third heaven is the object of the creation, why doesn't Genesis or Paul tell us? Is it something Paul heard while he was up there which it is forbidden to utter? If so why are you uttering it? If the entire history is in Genesis 1, why is there no mention of the third heaven or of it being the object of creation? I am happy with mystery. Even Paul understood that we only know in part, the we only see in a mirror darkly 1Cor 13:9&12.

Assyrian:>>Yes I get your goldfish bowl idea and that you think it was floating, but you still haven't addressed my point. What makes the firmament part of the world rather than something distinct from the world it contains?

According to Genesis 1:6-8 the firmament, IS the first world.It's the boundary which contains the heaven, earth, and water of Adam's world, inside it. Someone one told me it sounded like a hermetically sealed world. This would, of course, make it transportable, since it was self supporting. It would also protect it from other worlds.
In Love,
Aman

Of course you haven't answered my question. Gen 1:6-8 tells us the firmament separates the waters underneath it from the waters above it. It doesn't say it was the first world. Even if you think it contains the first world, which Genesis doesn't say, how do you make the leap from containing the first world to being the first world?

 

[Aman777]

I think it would be presumptuous to state that anyone who doesn't agree with your particular interpretation of Genesis 2:4-7 isn't a Bible believer. So I'm sure that's not really what you mean to say. You're certainly not claiming, for example, that the church fathers weren't Bible believers, and I know of none who held to a 3rd day creation of man.

Dear Chet, The Church fathers believed the traditional Creation story by Faith, which is as it should be. It's different once you have been shown that Scripture does NOT say what you have believed it said. No one showed the Church fathers what Genesis 2:4-7 actually said. The Church fathers accepted the traditional religious view as correct, and didn't question it.

I'm sorry I have put some of you in this peculiar position, but just because we have believed, by Faith, that man was formed of the dust of the ground, on the 6th Day, that doesn't match God's Holy Word which tells us that man was formed of the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day. Shall we continue on in this error? Or should we openly proclaim God's Truth in spite of the fact that it makes ALL of us a little uncomfortable?

Is it necessary that we get our true origin story correct since a true understanding of Genesis 2:4-7 destroys the False Teaching that we evolved from other living creatures? Since man was made on the 3rd Day, he is the FIRST creature made and NOT the last, as Science and Theistic Evolution falsely teaches.

The Church should take the position that man did NOT evolve from any other living being as Genesis 2:4-7 clearly shows. That's God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman

 

[ChetSinger]

Dear Chet, The Church fathers believed the traditional Creation story by Faith, which is as it should be. It's different once you have been shown that Scripture does NOT say what you have believed it said. No one showed the Church fathers what Genesis 2:4-7 actually said. The Church fathers accepted the traditional religious view as correct, and didn't question it.

Wow.

I think you see a problem where none exist. And that's why you've pursued a train of thought that no one else seems to have taken. Would you please take a moment to re-read the paragraph from Creation that I excerpted? Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis can be reconciled without discarding the beliefs the Church has held for so long. Really, they can.

 

[Aman777]

Chet:>>I'm sorry I have put some of you in this peculiar position, but just because we have believed, by Faith, that man was formed of the dust of the ground, on the 6th Day, that doesn't match God's Holy Word which tells us that man was formed of the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day. Shall we continue on in this error? Or should we openly proclaim God's Truth in spite of the fact that it makes ALL of us a little uncomfortable?

Is it necessary that we get our true origin story correct since a true understanding of Genesis 2:4-7 destroys the False Teaching that we evolved from other living creatures? Since man was made on the 3rd Day, he is the FIRST creature made and NOT the last, as Science and Theistic Evolution falsely teaches.

The Church should take the position that man did NOT evolve from any other living being as Genesis 2:4-7 clearly shows. That's God's Truth.

Chet:>>Wow.

I think you see a problem where none exist. And that's why you've pursued a train of thought that no one else seems to have taken. Would you please take a moment to re-read the paragraph from Creation that I excerpted? Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis can be reconciled without discarding the beliefs the Church has held for so long. Really, they can.

Dear Chet, Remind me which paragraph you excerpted. I will show you why this interpretation agrees with Scripture, and your's does not. I know that God's Holy Word will support the account I write of. I would like to show you of that support.

In Love,
Aman

 

[ChetSinger]

Dear Chet, Remind me which paragraph you excerpted. I will show you why this interpretation agrees with Scripture, and your's does not. I know that God's Holy Word will support the account I write of. I would like to show you of that support.

Post #77.

Here's another, in a similar vein. These guys are Bible believers, too:

Feedback: Do Genesis 1 and 2 Contradict Each Other?

Many mistakenly believe that Genesis 2:5-6 refers to the third day (Genesis 1:11-13) of the creation week because of the plants mentioned. However, these two specific plant categories mentioned in verses 5 and 6 (i.e., shrub of the field, plant of the field) are very different than the plants created on day three (fruit trees, grass, plants yielding seed). The shrubs of the field were plants with thorns, which only came about after man sinned. The plant of the field refers to cultivated plants. These were not in existence on the third day, because man had not been created, and, obviously, had not fallen yet to bring about thorns.

 

[Aman777]

Originally Posted by Aman777

Dear Chet, Remind me which paragraph you excerpted. I will show you why this interpretation agrees with Scripture, and your's does not. I know that God's Holy Word will support the account I write of. I would like to show you of that support.
​

Post #77.

Chet:>>Here's another, in a similar vein. These guys are Bible believers, too:

Feedback: Do Genesis 1 and 2 Contradict Each Other?

Many mistakenly believe that Genesis 2:5-6 refers to the third day (Genesis 1:11-13) of the creation week because of the plants mentioned.

Dear Chet, Thanks for posting this obviously incorrect theory.

Feeback:>>However, these two specific plant categories mentioned in verses 5 and 6 (i.e., shrub of the field, plant of the field) are very different than the plants created on day three (fruit trees, grass, plants yielding seed).

The plants which grew on the 3rd Day include:

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after His kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after His kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after His kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

The only things mentioned are grass, herbs and trees. Here is the account in Genesis 2:4-5:

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,
5 And EVERY PLANT of the field before it was in the earth, and EVERY HERB of the field before it grew:

This identifies the specific time on the 3rd Day. It was after the Earth was made but BEFORE the plants and herbs grew. But, Where are the trees?


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.
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 three plants are specific to a certain time on the 3rd Day. It was after the Earth was made, the man was made, the plants and herbs were made and finally, the Trees which were made AFTER man was made. That's God's Truth.


Foolishness:>>The shrubs of the field were plants with thorns, which only came about after man sinned. The plant of the field refers to cultivated plants. These were not in existence on the third day, because man had not been created, and, obviously, had not fallen yet to bring about thorns.

Ask these so called scholars to support their silly idea of some sort of plants and thorns being different from EVERY plant. In order to believe such silliness, one must believe it by Faith, since it makes no sense Scripurally. The LORD cursed the ground AFTER Cain killed Abel:

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

I suppose the scholars think the thorns were dormant until after Adam sinned. Scripture indicates they would fit in the category of "Every Plant, Herb, and Tree" which Scripture shows GREW on the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:9-10 and Genesis 2:5-8

Feedback at AIG is refuted, Scripturally.

In Love,
Aman
​

 

[ChetSinger]

I give up. Do your own thing, if you must.

 

[Aman777]

Chet:>>I give up. Do your own thing, if you must.

Dear Chet, It's nothing personal. It'a a refute of lack of standards of AIG, not you. That's why I asked you to post something like that. I knew God's Holy Word would stand and any other interpretation would fall. It comes from years of debating the subject with people who prefer to change Scripture into fables.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

Answers in Genesis:>>Genesis 1:1–2:3 provides us with a chronological account of what God did on each of the days during the creation week. Genesis 2:4–25 zooms in on day six and shows some of the events of that day.1 Let’s take a look at what happened on day six, according to Genesis 2, and we’ll see there is no discrepancy here.

• Adam is created (Genesis 2:7)

Dear Readers, Strike one. Genesis 2:7 says that man was "formed" of the dust of the ground, on the 3rd Day, the SAME Day the Earth was made, but Before the plants, which were also made the 3rd Day. Genesis 2:4-7

• AIG:>>Garden of Eden created (Genesis 2:8–9)

Strike 2. This event did NOT happen on the 6th Day, but instead on the 3rd Day. The TREES were the last plants to be made and the LORD put them in the Garden of Eden. Genesis 2:8 and Genesis 1:13

• <LI sizset="18" sizcache="14">AIG:>>Description of river system in Eden (Genesis 2:10–14) <LI sizset="19" sizcache="14">Adam put in Garden and given instructions (Genesis 2:15–17)<LI sizset="19" sizcache="14"><LI sizset="19" sizcache="14">These events took place at the end of the 3rd Day. Genesis 2:8 NOT the 6th Day.<LI sizset="19" sizcache="14"><LI sizset="19" sizcache="14">
• AIG:>>Adam names some of the kinds of animals (Genesis 2:18–20)

Correct finally. At the beginning of the present 6th Day, Jesus made the beasts of the field and the birds and brought them to Adam who named them. This is Scriptural PROOF that Adam was made BEFORE the traditional view that he was the last of the creatures made. Adam was already there on the morning of the 6th Day.

• AIG:>>God creates Eve (Genesis 2:21–22)

FALSE. Eve is made from Adam's rib. She is NOT "created in God's Image" until AFTER Cain kills Abel, and then she and Adam are BOTH "created in God's Image" or in Christ, Spiritually. Genesis 5:1-2

• AIG:>>Description of Adam, Eve, and marriage (Genesis 2:23–25)

The particular issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1.

As you should be able to see, AIG strikes out and gets NOTHING correct. Sounds to me like a PTL (Pass the Loot) organization.

In Love,
Aman

 

[granpa]

Aman you helped me out immensely.

there are at least 4 adams:

one created on the 3rd day.
one created on the 5th day (adamant)
one created on the 6th day (adamah)
one created after the sabbath on the 8th day.

 

[Aman777]

Aman you helped me out immensely.

there are at least 4 adams:

one created on the 3rd day.
one created on the 5th day (adamant)
one created on the 6th day (adamah)
one created after the sabbath on the 8th day.

Dear Grandpa, The Adam made on the 3rd Day was physical Adam.
The one created on the 5th Day was prehistoric Natural man.
The one created on the 6th Day is the same one formed on the 3rd Day, and shows when Adam was born again Spiritually.

I am unaware of an 8th Day. I do agree that Adam, made on the 3rd Day, and created in God's Image on the 6th Day, are the SAME person, and he will be present in the 3rd Heaven on the 7th Day, which has no ending. Correct?

In Love,
Aman

 

[Assyrian]

Aman you helped me out immensely.

there are at least 4 adams:

one created on the 3rd day.
one created on the 5th day (adamant)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjYCvC7koBg

one created on the 6th day (adamah)
one created after the sabbath on the 8th day.

 

[Aman777]

Grandpa:>>there are at least 4 adams:

one created on the 3rd day.
one created on the 5th day (adamant)

Assyrian:>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjYCvC7koBg

Dear Assyrian, You are correct. What you showed was natural man, the descendant of the prehistoric people who got here through Evolution (Adaptation). Their origin was in the water on the 5th Day, some 3.7 Billion years ago. They are scattered all over our Universe.

You left out the Adam who was created in God's Image on the 6th Day, and whom we will meet in the 3rd Heaven, since his creation is an Eternal Creation. This is Adam, the first human, made before ANY other living creature, showing that Adam could NOT have evolved from any other being, thus Destroying the False Theory of Evolution, Scripturally.

In Love,
Aman

 

[granpa]

Dear Grandpa, I just got 1 Gig of memory and now I think I can go to your site. If you would, please send me the link, now that I should be able to go there. Thanks.

In Love,
Aman

You chose a good time to get more memory.
My charts have just now started to come together and I continue to work on them daily.

I strongly urge you to broaden your mind and study not just bible1 and bible2 but also the greek and especially the navajo. Norse is also interesting but I only have the first part done right.

Some parts are more reliable than others. I have edited the main page to give an indication of which parts are reliable and which parts are guesswork or in some cases even just placeholders.

I use cutepdf maker to print the pages at kinkos.
you can find some of these pdfs here

 

[Aman777]

Granpa:>>You chose a good time to get more memory.
My charts have just now started to come together and I continue to work on them daily.

Dear Granpa, Thanks for your patience. Now the Charts come in loud, clear, and fast. My only question is please explain Adam #4. Is he Adam in the 3rd Heaven?

In Love,
Aman

 

[granpa]

And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: 15 For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
16 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth



the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.
5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.


I just got done working on the Zoroastrianism chart.
It also fits the pattern
http://religion.wikia.com/wiki/Comparative_mythology_chart/Zoroastrianism