- Mar 25, 2014
- 371
- 66
- 49
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Yes.Your profile says you are Baptist. Would that be Southern Baptist?
Upvote
0
Yes.Your profile says you are Baptist. Would that be Southern Baptist?
I was Southern Baptist for some years. I never heard or read these things that you are saying from the Southern Baptist brothers.Yes.
I was Southern Baptist for some years. I never heard or read these things that you are saying from the Southern Baptist brothers.
Is it possible this come from Southern Baptist :Ruin-restoration creationism, Gap creationism, Clarence Larkin, etc. These are all very Southern Baptist things.
Is it possible this come from Southern Baptist :
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible
What is presented talk about a Gap of billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 [using the original Hebrew text Genesis 1:2 The Earth Became a waste and a desolation tohu bohu ] ....That angels [not all] once inhabited the Earth in the First Earth Age ----You know these sons of God mentioned in Job who shouted for joy when God created the Earth ....That Satan rebellion against God came from that time in the first Earth age ...
Link:
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible
I have heard of this gap theory, and because of the Gen.1:2 reference to water being there, I have wondered about it. I will check our the links and video.
Consider that there have been 10's of thousands of archaeological digs through the course of history and none have come up with any evidence to validate any of these stories -they all will have their own explanations of various sorts but no real hard evidence.
We will not know if there was truly any other race of beings before Adam until Jesus returns to tell us about the whole details of the Creation of the world as told by He Jesus the Creator of the world
One thing we do have that is proven is that when you have a group of people -say 30 people sitting in row of chairs and you say something to a person at one end of the row and tell them to pass it on to the next person and they to the next person and they to the next person and so on - by the time it reaches the end of the row it has been changed from what was originally said at the other end . It may change a little or it may change dramatically depending on the people in the row of chairs ,
We do know that the account of the story of creation told of in Genesis was not written down in the time period in which it occurred - rather it was a oral account that was passed on from generation to generation until the time of Moses that it finally got written down -
Consider how many generations of people passed down these oral accounts and the changes that would have occurred from passing it on from one person to the next over generations of time .
Now consider the various interpretations we have being taught today of what we do have written in Genesis and still we cannot prove it.
We accept that which was happening during the times of Moses but we do not know how many generations existed before Moses in provable manner as we only have what was said to have been in a record created during the time frame of Moses.
The thing is -it is not able to prove any new creation theory a reality ;if we could it would have been done - carbon radiometric dating is not a perfect science and has flaws which is why there are various time dating that are from different science agencies , one may say the earth is 50 million years old and another will say it is 200 million years old and another say it is 500,000 years old -There is a ton of archaeological evidence supporting many potential types of people over time and fits well within what I have presented. Also, geologically this makes much more sense. In addition, this meshes nicely with proposed geological time scales. Although my interest is in harmonizing scripture and not so much science, its seems nice not trying to fight science to support what I think and feel is right.
No not at all - but to avoid any heretical problems in teaching it is best to continue to examine the archaeological digs to see if they find something that can prove one way or another .So should we scrap an idea that harmonizes many different things, all in the interest of tradition.
IMO it makes more sense to think that the "Let us make man in our image" - refers to the Father God , Holy Spirit and Jesus as mankind was created in their image and not the image of a human man reincarnatedRead the verse below. Think about if man already existed and he was being re-made. If you think about it, it seems man was be remade in a different form or image.
Genesis 1:26
The First Earth Age ... well described in that page:Once a person realizes that there is a gap and that Eden existed before Genesis 1:2. We can reconcile many things. The fall of the Assyrian Lucifer being one of them (Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 31, and Ezekiel 28) and the placement of the deep (Genesis 1:2). what Genesis is talking about.
This is also why in some books of the Bible seem to be talking about different creations. For example, the creation events in Job are describing the creation of the world or this first creation. Creation content in Psalms also is describing the first creation.
What is described after Genesis 1:2 concern our actual Earth Age ....This is why they do not sound like they are describing what is perceived as the classic Genesis 1:2-Genesis 2:3 creation account.
The things described in Jude 6&7 and what Genesis is talking about.
It all makes much more sense when you look at this way.
We will not know if there was truly any other race of beings before Adam until Jesus returns to tell us about the whole details of the Creation of the world as told by He Jesus the Creator of the world
Listen and learn: [Good finding by Postview ]Why would we need to wait until then, and why wouldn't we already truly know there was not a race of beings before Adam?
Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Obviously if there was a race of beings before Adam, this race would have also included women. Yet the text above indicates there was no such thing as women until God made one, and that Adam then said--- she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. The text doesn't say she shall be called woman because women already existed prior to the creation of man on the 6th day. It says she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of Man. How does it make sense that there may have been a race of beings before Adam, but that this race contained no women?
Adam tells us why she is called woman. How then could there have already been other women existing before one is made according to the text above?
Assuming a previous race of beings and that this included males and females, and that the males were men, what were the females then, if not women? But how could any of them be a woman if no such thing as a woman even existed until God made one according to Genesis 2? How can one be a female but not a woman? Clearly then, no race of beings existed before Adam. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Easily debunked.
Listen and learn: [Good finding by Postview]
Why would we need to wait until then, and why wouldn't we already truly know there was not a race of beings before Adam?
Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Obviously if there was a race of beings before Adam, this race would have also included women. Yet the text above indicates there was no such thing as women until God made one, and that Adam then said--- she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. The text doesn't say she shall be called woman because women already existed prior to the creation of man on the 6th day. It says she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of Man. How does it make sense that there may have been a race of beings before Adam, but that this race contained no women?
Adam tells us why she is called woman. How then could there have already been other women existing before one is made according to the text above?
Assuming a previous race of beings and that this included males and females, and that the males were men, what were the females then, if not women? But how could any of them be a woman if no such thing as a woman even existed until God made one according to Genesis 2? How can one be a female but not a woman? Clearly then, no race of beings existed before Adam. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Easily debunked.
There is no link to an article ...That video is 40 minutes in length. Do you have a link to an article instead? My connection today is pretty laggy, so watching vids on YouTube is not practical for me. Especially lengthy vids.
Listen and learn: [Good finding by Postview ]
If you just go skimming here and there you will miss the details.On YouTube I have an addon to download audio only, so I did. So I began skimming through this 40 minute video that I downloaded as audio, and already I have encountered a few problems with the thinking of the person in the video. One being that he apparently thinks Genesis 1 and 2 are not the same creation account. That,too, is easily debunked.