Theological Questions for Day-Age Creationists

[mark kennedy]

Indeed, but much closer to a Kennedy liberal—pro-life, pro-marriage, and pro-nationalism (for it was Jesus that divided the nations). Today we call this a conservative.

Jesus wasn't political in his orientation, he was inclusive very early in is ministry which makes him a lot like a liberal. He did affirm the Law of Moses and the faith of the Patriarchs which would make him conservative in any sense that has real meaning. He was and is everything both parties pretend to be with one exception, he delivers, something neither party has been able to do consistantly.

 

[Calminian]

Jesus wasn't political in his orientation, he was inclusive very early in is ministry which makes him a lot like a liberal. He did affirm the Law of Moses and the faith of the Patriarchs which would make him conservative in any sense that has real meaning. He was and is everything both parties pretend to be with one exception, he delivers, something neither party has been able to do consistantly.

No, but he was moral. There's a notion among those that want to be politely liberal, that God doesn't care about political evils. You can support any political evil you like, so long as you personally don't commit evil. so the argument goes. i would say Christ was against all evil, including political evil. He's grieved by the genocide committed against he unborn today in America (just crossed the 60 million mark this year).

 

[mark kennedy]

No, but he was moral. There's a notion among those that want to be politely liberal, that God doesn't care about political evils. You can support any political evil you like, so long as you personally don't commit evil. so the argument goes. i would say Christ was against all evil, including political evil. He's grieved by the genocide committed against he unborn today in America (just crossed the 60 million mark this year).

I don't disagree with that, I've long admired how the Catholics have been 100% consistant on their prolife stand, even when it was just contraception. Jesus sent away the Herodians, or any political factions, when you are rightful heir to the throne of David you can do that. Jesus wasn't just opposed to evil in the political arena, he knew how to cure it in the human heart. While it might not seem politically viable, it still changes lives forever.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Calminian]

I don't disagree with that, I've long admired how the Catholics have been 100% consistant on their prolife stand, even when it was just contraception. Jesus sent away the Herodians, or any political factions, when you are rightful heir to the throne of David you can do that. Jesus wasn't just opposed to evil in the political arena, he knew how to cure it in the human heart. While it might not seem politically viable, it still changes lives forever.

Yes, he sent away the Herodians and the Pharisees who opposed him. He didn't condemn them for being in leadership positions per se. He condemned them for doing wrong. But he also affirmed their political authority.

Today, We The People are the political authority in America. We're the emperor so to speak. We, as a body, appoint the electors that appoint the most powerful governing authorities on earth.

The ultimate answer is the Gospel, but if it's not transforming the professing Church into pro-lifers how's it going to transform unbelievers into pro-lifers?

 

[hiwaystar]

1. A day is a day. Period.
2. The answer is Satan. Even before sin, Satan could've still corrupted some of God's creations.
3. Layers of the fossil record prove a universal flood.

 

[Mathetes66]

Turtlehugger, please see my posts on pg 13: Earth, then light (Big Bang), Created on Day One; Sun, Moon and Stars Created on Day Four

Hope that helps and gives you confidence in the historical narrative of Genesis 1 (not a symbolic, allegorical false interpretation) and the meaning of 'yom' (day) when the specific 'qualifiers' are attached to it. Mixing the account of God creating the heavens and the earth with naturalistic evolutionary theory is to mix the truth with lies. God creating the universe is the clearest evidence to mankind of His omnipotence and Deity! (see Romans 1:18ff). When that evidence, both from within and without, is suppressed, the the truth is exchanged for a lie.

Your three questions at the beginning of this thread were excellent!

 

[Queller]

If the "day" is supposed to be figurative, why can't evening and morning be figurative as well? Personally, I don't think there is any doubt that the author(s) of Gen 1 meant ordinary 24-hour days--the purpose of using them being to reflect the six work day plus Sabbath week which had already become customary by the time the story was written.

This can't be stated enough times.

 

[Newtheran]

2. Death before sin, and probably disease before sin. How can it be that misery could have existed before Adam and Eve sinned?

You've hit upon the fundamental philosophical problem in all attempts to reconcile old earth evolutionary theory with the Genesis record (including the day-age theory).

In the evolutionary model, millions of years of death are the process through which life is created.

In the Genesis record, all life was created according to its kind prior to death entering the world as a destructive, not a constructive, force. The need for a messiah cannot be divorced from the history of humanity as recorded in Genesis.

 

[roman2819]

I'm currently ambiguous on how the interpretation of Gen. 1 ought to be interpreted. My church leans more towards young earth creationism, but I am having trouble believing certain aspects of it as I also do with Old Earth Creationism.
I'm looking for theological answers not so much scientific ones. This isn't hostile at all, I just want to understand you guys better.
I just wanted to ask some of my most heavy questions:

1. I understand with the day age theory, each "day" supposedly represents an age, and that the word "yom" has multiple meanings. My trouble comes when it says "there was evening and there was the morning: the first day/day one." It seems like the author is defining the word yom as some sort of daylight cycle. How would a day age theorist handle this?

2. Death before sin, and probably disease before sin. How can it be that misery could have existed before Adam and Eve sinned?

3. What do you believe about the Flood? Do you believe it was a universal Flood? Or do you believe it was a local Flood, and how can you justify it Scripturally?

I believe that "then there was evening and morning" means the end of one age/stage of creation and beginning of another. In the first 3 "days" the phrase "there was evening and then morning" was already used, but the sun and moon were only created on the 4th day, so evening and morning does not mean the sunset evening or sunrise morning because

I am sure the creation did not just happen in six days. I believe God took much time and interests to create the ecology and varieties of trees and vegetation , then design the multitude of living creatures and animals. The word "day" means "stage" or "age", But the Scripture use the word "day" because "day" fit the prose of writing in religious manuscript, but "day" in Genesis 1 and 2 certainly does not mean a 24-hour day. In other words, "day" is figurative, not literal.

The real creation might have taken years, decades or 100s or 1000s of years. Humans are finite, we live one generation - usually less than 90 years - and we think short term. But God is timeless and HE is not rushed by time. Why would HE create millions of fauna and creatures in 6x24 hours?

Instead God take interests and pleasure to plan out and create the many varieties of fauna and vegetation. Then He designed the multitude of creatures - He took much interests and pleasure in their appearance and characteristics.

An analogy: Think of people who love to assemble models of planes, tans or figures. They wouldn't want to buy a ready all-finished models -- instead, they enjoy the processing of putting the pieces together, then paint them. Same for people that enjoy assembling a 1000-pieces jigsaw puzzle - the process takes time, it is slow, but to them it is interesting and intriguing.

 

[coffee4u]

[QUOTE="TurtleHugger, post: 71146277, member: 397286"[/quote]

I am a 6 day creationist.
Exodus 20
20 And God spoke all these words:
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

1. I understand with the day age theory, each "day" supposedly represents an age, and that the word "yom" has multiple meanings. My trouble comes when it says "there was evening and there was the morning: the first day/day one." It seems like the author is defining the word yom as some sort of daylight cycle. How would a day age theorist handle this?

Genesis 3
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

As to what that light was, scripture doesn't say.
Perhaps the light radiated from God himself, perhaps it was the angelic host or some other temporary light source. We can't know that, but we can know that light was present.
All the earth requires is a large light source shining on it while it turns to make the day/night cycle and light was present.

2. Death before sin, and probably disease before sin. How can it be that misery could have existed before Adam and Eve sinned?

There was no misery before they sinned- or more precisely before Adam sinned. Eve sinned but the fall was Adam's fault. Death and misery were directly attributed to what he did, because he listened to her. He didn't have to he chose to.
Genesis 3:17
To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’
“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

3. What do you believe about the Flood? Do you believe it was a universal Flood? Or do you believe it was a local Flood, and how can you justify it Scripturally?

Yes I believe in a world wide flood.

Genesis 7
21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died.

Genesis 9
2 And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13 I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life.

There has been many local floods, so if the flood was merely local then God has not kept his promise and the convent to never flood the earth in such a way again is meaningless.

Jesus also links the end of this world back to how the earlier world was destroyed.
2 peter 3
5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
I hardly think the day of judgment will be a local fire. It will be the entirety of the earth and the heavens just as the flood was the entirety of the first earth. Then the new heavens and world will take its place.
Revelation 21-22
Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.