Exodus 20:9-11 (Creation)

[SavedByGrace3]

Many people think that the earth was created in Gen 1:1, and that the 6 days were a "recreation" of sorts where things that had been destroyed were either recreated or set back in order from the chaos of Gen 1:2. But even so I do not think anyone is calling God a liar or any such hyperbole. I suspect these folks love God just as much as you do and are just trying to work these things out. Give them a break. Consider the possibility that you could be wrong too.
I suspect when we all get to heaven we will all be surprised how wrong we were on many items, and wish we had not been so hard on our brothers and sisters about their errors. Mellow out... love God and love your brother. They need you, and you need them. The coming troubles in the world will drive us together in unity and faith. Let it happen. Don't say anything you will regret when that day comes. Peace it out in Him!

 

[Queller]

Your thoughts are not His thoughts. Isaiah 55:9 But my thoughts are His thoughts...and you think it all silly.

You're wrong. The verse you posted states that God's thoughts are higher than your thoughts, therefore, unless you are God, your thoughts are not God's thoughts.

There is no difference of interpretation,

Ludicrous.

only those who receive the truth, and those who do not.

Then I feel sorry that you did not receive the truth.

 

[Queller]

I am unaware how many times I posted it. Generally, I posted it where the discussion turned to biblical contradictions. I don't know what you mean about correct formatting and probably don't care. I am taking the risk of speaking informally, without editing, here. I stand by anything I said. I know it to be solid material and feel it is worthwhile sharing.

You posted it four times on one page, including three consecutive posts. It doesn't need to be shared that many times simultaneously, especially with no changes.

And the huge gaping spaces of no text makes it difficult to read.

 

[Queller]

Sorry, again, I didn't want to spend a lot of time on this so I just responded to the part I read.

Then maybe you should actually read the entire post before responding.

 

[Queller]

Someone tells you that a rock is billions of years old an you think that's God's evidence; overriding His word? Riiiiight.

God gave us minds to seek. I do not think that millions of scientists, of all different faiths, coming to the same conclusion, are wrong. Nor, as I have attempted to explain several times and you seem to be ignoring, do I think that the scientific evidence overrules God's Word. I think it casts into doubt a literalist interpretation of God's Word and therefore the literalist interpretation is wrong.

Or do you think there is a mountain high enough to see all the kingdoms of the world that existed at the time of Jesus?

 

[Queller]

That is a wrong assumption, It has been heard, I've seen/considered it, and thus far, have seen nothing that convinces me evolution is a fact.

Just out of curiosity, what evidence would convince you?

 

[Queller]

The contradiction comes from the culture, syntax and literary flow of misunderstanding.

Genesis 1 - 2:3 is a summary of His entire creation - including us. You can see this contextually by Genesis 2:1 - where it is declared God's work was COMPLETED. Adam and Eve were created in these days.

Genesis 2:4 to the end of the world is the our entire, full story from the instant He made us, to the end of the world and judgment.

"These are the [account of the] generations..."

In other words, Genesis 2:4 on gives the future account of humans on earth. There is no 6th day human creation and 8th day Ademic creation.

If you have seen a Star Wars movie, before the movie starts you get a rolling page about what has happened already - a full summary of the context and situation. It is meant to bring you up to speed. THEN, the movie begins. The rolling summary screen is Gen 1 - Gen 2:3; the movie is Gen 2:4 - end.


As I have said before, the apocrypha (and even other texts and books) explain many of these holes and contradictions in great detail. But, you don't need them; it is right in the canon.

How many blind men did Jesus heal at Jericho?

 

[ScottA]

You're wrong. The verse you posted states that God's thoughts are higher than your thoughts, therefore, unless you are God, your thoughts are not God's thoughts.

Ludicrous.

Then I feel sorry that you did not receive the truth.

I agree with God, because we are of One mind, I have the mind of Christ.

But do not feel sorry for me, but for yourself. The verse I quoted was for you, because you do not agree with God, and therefore, you do not agree with me or any who know Him.

 

[Steve Petersen]

I agree with God, because we are of One mind, I have the mind of Christ.

But do not feel sorry for me, but for yourself. The verse I quoted was for you, because you do not agree with God, and therefore, you do not agree with me or any who know Him.

To equate your understanding of the Bible with the perfect intent of God is hubris to the max.

 

[SkyWriting]

I don't reject the Scriptures. I reject any interpretation of the Scriptures that conflict with my interpretation of the evidence ...

I fixed this sentence for you!

 

[SkyWriting]

1. So we can't trust the eyes God gave us, the hands God gave us, the brains God gave us?

That's been proven thousands of ways.
Nat Geo has an ongoing series to show you how unreliable your brain is.
http://braingames.nationalgeographic.com/

 

[Kenny'sID]

Just out of curiosity, what evidence would convince you?

Convince me of what specifically? There are a few branches from the topic floating around here so...

 

[KWCrazy]

God gave us minds to seek.

As he gave Adam the ability to choose whether or not to defy His only rule and eat the forbidden fruit. We saw how that turned out.
Oh, wait. You don't believe that happened.
When Jesus quoted Genesis two regarding Adam and Eve, He was clearly lacking the benefit of modern science.
Of course we also know that the story of Cain and Abel is false. Too bad nobody told Jesus when He said, in Luke 11: "Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all."
Too bad Christ didn't have access to modern science. He believe the Scriptures were accurate.

I do not think that millions of scientists, of all different faiths, coming to the same conclusion, are wrong.

I think BILLIONS of people of all faiths are wrong.
I don't pretend that I am right. I am, however, secure in the knowledge that God is right.

Nor, as I have attempted to explain several times and you seem to be ignoring, do I think that the scientific evidence overrules God's Word. I think it casts into doubt a literalist interpretation of God's Word and therefore the literalist interpretation is wrong.

You know, I've read the term "literalist interpretation" so many times if I never read it again I'll be happy. There is no such thing because literalism requires belief as read; no interpretation.
The fact is that the Bible is perfectly clear that in the beginning GOD CREATED the heaven's and the earth, and that GOD CREATED all living things in six days. There is no possible interpretation that would allow for the evolution of life without entirely rejecting the book of Genesis. You DO reject it, though you pretend you don't.
You disbelief in the creation of the earth.
You disbelieve in original sin, which brought death into the world,
You disbelieve in the genealogy of man from Adam to the flood.
You disbelieve there was a global flood.
You disbelieve in the re-population of the world after the flood.
It's not that evolution believers interpret the Bible differently, you outright REJECT anything in the Bible which interferes with that which you have chosen to believe.

Or do you think there is a mountain high enough to see all the kingdoms of the world that existed at the time of Jesus?

Yes, because I believe it was a vision, not a specific vantage point, and it was a spiritual journey more than a physical one.
Maybe you can shorten things up for us and list for us the things in the Bible which you DO believe. It must be hard to believe that Jesus was the son of God when He was obviously wrong about so many things that your science teachers told you. Know what else they were wrong about? Benevolent mutations do NOT advance a species, nothing has ever evolved into anything, and without an outside Creator there is no scientifically valid explanation for the origination of anything.

 

[ScottA]

To equate your understanding of the Bible with the perfect intent of God is hubris to the max.

My confidence is not in me, but in God. I believe Him. 1 Corinthians 2:16

 

[Kenny'sID]

Many people think that the earth was created in Gen 1:1, and that the 6 days were a "recreation" of sorts where things that had been destroyed were either recreated or set back in order from the chaos of Gen 1:2. But even so I do not think anyone is calling God a liar or any such hyperbole. I suspect these folks love God just as much as you do and are just trying to work these things out. Give them a break. Consider the possibility that you could be wrong too.
I suspect when we all get to heaven we will all be surprised how wrong we were on many items, and wish we had not been so hard on our brothers and sisters about their errors. Mellow out... love God and love your brother. They need you, and you need them. The coming troubles in the world will drive us together in unity and faith. Let it happen. Don't say anything you will regret when that day comes. Peace it out in Him!

So then, we would have to define what God meant by "In the beginning"? Beginning of what? Beginning of everything? Beginning of a particular earth age?

Finally, plausible reason to at least consider possibilities. As they say, always good to start at the very beginning when trying to solve any problem/answer questions.

 

[ScottA]

I suspect when we all get to heaven we will all be surprised how wrong we were on many items, and wish we had not been so hard on our brothers and sisters about their errors. Mellow out... love God and love your brother. They need you, and you need them. The coming troubles in the world will drive us together in unity and faith. Let it happen. Don't say anything you will regret when that day comes. Peace it out in Him!

Your heart is in the right place...but even Jesus rebuked Peter, whom He loved.

We do not fight or quarrel, or even rebuke, against the errors of brothers and sisters (though some do) - but against harmful conjecture, and the blind leading the blind into the abyss. We crack the whip, for beyond the whip is only darkness.

Let us do all things in love.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

So then, we would have to define what God meant by "In the beginning"? Beginning of what? Beginning of everything? Beginning of a particular earth age?

Finally, plausible reason to at least consider possibilities. As they say, always good to start at the very beginning when trying to solve any problem/answer questions.

In this context Kenny, I think "beginning" refers to the beginning of time as we understanding it. A moment before the beginning there was nothing. The next moment everything existed and was ready to be inhabited. This is all in verse 1. What happened in the rest of the chapter was in response to verse two... where the Spirit hovered over a creation that had come into chaos. He did not create it a chaos. Something happened to make it that way.

The Pulpit Commentary on ISA 45:18>

Thus saith the Lord that created the heavens -
he is God - that formed the earth and made it;
he established it;
he created it not a chaos,
but formed it to be inhabited:
I am the Lord, and there is none else
ISA 45:18

So something happened between verse 1 and verse 2 to change it from a habitable form into chaos.
That is the "gap" in the "gap theory."

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

There you go assuming again. Who are you to say I don't give it fair evaluation?

Besides, I could make the exact same comments to you. Would you tell me you do make fair evaluation or are you one of the conditioned?

Clearly we disagree as to who is making the fair evaluation. Since we have to disagree . . . . we can each of us concede, I hope, that the other is doing the best they can with what they know and trust to believe and understand the truth about God.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Your heart is in the right place...but even Jesus rebuked Peter, whom He loved.

We do not fight or quarrel, or even rebuke, against the errors of brothers and sisters (though some do) - but against harmful conjecture, and the blind leading the blind into the abyss. We crack the whip, for beyond the whip is only darkness.

Let us do all things in love.

I guess my response Scott is this:
Don't be surprized if that whip is directed at you, or that you are the one being rebuked.
We all do our best and we all think we are correct. Even solid literallists differ on many things. Nobody, no matter how intelligent or in tune with the Spirit is right about everything. Including me. We need to walk in that understanding an extend some compassion toward each other.
As you said.. in love
Peace

 

[Kenny'sID]

In this context Kenny, I think "beginning" refers to the beginning of time as we understanding it. A moment before the beginning there was nothing. The next moment everything existed and was ready to be inhabited. This is all in verse 1. What happened in the rest of the chapter was in response to verse two... where the Spirit hovered over a creation that had come into chaos. He did not create it a chaos. Something happened to make it that way.

Yes, possibly beginning of our time, but even then, that is still a maybe. Certainly not the beginning OF time because God existed already.

Yes, a moment before the beginning of our time there was nothing, but nothing as in our universe or nothing period?

On the creation of chaos, you are right, he didn't create chaos, that could very well have just been a step in the process and that was the only thing that "made it that way". Just as we would create say, a painting, first it's nothing then we add a background color with no form and void of details, then the rest.

So many possibilities, and glad you brought it up to explore.