Earth created in 6 days?

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Originally posted by Art Vandalay
I'm curious what others think on this one especially since I'm new to this site:
Did God create the earth in 6 - 24 hr. periods, or over a much longer period of time. Was the term "days" just a term used to break up the periods of when things were created e.g. light and dark seperated, water, etc.
What are your thoughts?

”In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was formless, void and empty, and darkness was over the face of the deep, and the Spirit or Wind of God hovered over the face of the waters.” Genesis 1:1-2 gives an overview of the beginning of God’s creation of the universe. Verses 3-31 complete the story of creation, which the Bible sets out as occurring on six days. Did God create the universe in a total of 144 hours of our time, or are other interpretations more likely? Judging from the discussions of this and related questions on various threads on both the CF and other Christian message boards I have seen thus far, there seem to be at least five major theories that have been advanced:


1. There are those who ignore what the Bible says, or who disbelieve it or discount it. They point out that scientific measurements place the age of the universe as being between 10-20 billion years of age, with the most likely time being about 14-17 billion years of our time. They say that there is no way to reconcile the Bible to the factual evidence, and therefore they choose to ignore at least this portion of the Bible, dismissing it as a fable or a story Moses merely inserted to answer questions from an unenlightened people wandering in the wilderness. Since they tend not to be Christians or Jews and generally do not recognize the Bible as being the word of God, any biblical evidence to the contrary is generally brushed aside and discounted, or is used to support their claim that the Bible cannot really be trusted as being true.


2. At the other extreme are those who believe the Bible means six consecutive 24-hour periods of time (i.e., 144 hours total), and they choose to ignore, disbelieve or discount the scientific evidence to the contrary, often stating that the appearance of a universe billions of light years across is merely an illusion (much as the fossils and rock strata that appear to be millions or billions of years old were merely “aged” by God to give them the appearance of being ancient), and that God is deceiving us in order to test our faith. Under this theory, the important thing is to not let one’s faith waiver in the face of contrary scientific evidence but rather to stand true to God’s word and one’s faith.

2A. One offshoot of this theory is interpreting the scriptures [Psalms 90:4 and 2Peter 3:8] that tell us that “With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day” as meaning that each day of Genesis should be treated as a thousand years. Under this variation, creation took 6,000 years instead of six days.

2B. Another variation off this theory is the Gap theory (also known as the Interval and Restitution theory, the Divine Judgment theory, and the Recreation theory) which was more popular about 50-80 years ago than it is now. The Gap theory is usually largely based upon the fact that Hebrew tends to be more general and less specific than English or Greek. Thus, Hebrew words can often have a wider range of meanings. In the first part of Genesis 1:2 ["and the earth it was formless, void and empty"], the verb hayethah (which is generally translated "it was") can also be translated as "it became." Proponents of the Gap Theory therefore generally claim that Genesis 1:2 should be translated to read "and the earth became formless, void and empty" rather than using the more common translation of the phrase. This theory uses passages (primarily in Isaiah and Ezekiel) regarding the fall of Satan or Lucifer to bolster the theory that the world was created in Gen. 1:1 but became formless and void because of Satan's fall, and then creation continued in verse two. There are, however, some proponents of the Gap theory who go about it slightly differently. Instead of translating hayethah as "it became" they use verse one of Genesis to emphasize that God had created the Earth "in the beginning" of creation, but by verse two, the Earth was formless, void and empty. These persons tend to ignore the fact that Hebrew had no single word for universe and that the Hebrew phrase "the heavens and the earth" is the Hebrew equivalent of the English word universe. Note: Some advocates of the Gap theory combine it with one of the theories more consistent with mainstream science (theories 3, 4 or 5, below) instead of with the young earth creationists.


Then there are those who attempt to reconcile scientific evidence with biblical evidence. Persons who adhere to one of these theories tend to believe that since God is responsible for both the biblical revelation and the natural world, the words of the Bible are true and at the same time are consistent with the facts of nature. In other words, they tend to think that God’s character and attributes are expressed through both channels, and neither negates nor contradicts the other. Theories 3-5 are the primary explanations I have found thus far that attempt to reconcile science and the Bible:

3. Since the Bible does not specifically say that the six days are consecutive, there are those who assert that each “day” is the time God spoke the next period of creation into existence—but there is an undetermined period of time (possibly lasting billions of years) between each day. In other words, adherents of this theory say there were six days of creation (each of which could be 24 hours—or 1,000 years—or some other period of time) separated by other periods of time. Some who follow this theory also point to the staccato pattern revealed in the fossil record, which indicates that there were periods of time when new forms of life suddenly burst onto the scene.

4. There are those who point out that the Hebrew word for “day” is yom, which can mean either a 24-hour period of time or an indefinite period of time. Thus, those who follow this theory say that each “day” was of an indefinite period of time (even millions or billions of years) and Christians shouldn’t get caught up in insisting that the Bible means something here that it probably does not mean.

5. The fifth theory is a more recent one that has been advanced by physicist and Hebrew Bible scholar Dr. Gerald L. Schroeder. He has proposed that the six “days” are in fact six consecutive 24-hour periods of time measured at the speed of outward thrust using Einstein's theory (or law) of relativity and a universal time-clock based on cosmic background radiation and the wavelength of light beginning about the time God initiated creation (what science now calls the Big Bang). Because of time dilation, 144 hours measured at a speed calculated by using such a universal time-clock would be equal to about 15.75 billion Earth-years looking back toward the time of creation.
 
Upvote 0

LewisWildermuth

Senior Veteran
May 17, 2002
2,526
128
51
Bloomington, Illinois
✟11,875.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Originally posted by Sinai
1. There are those who ignore what the Bible says, or who disbelieve it or discount it. They point out that scientific measurements place the age of the universe as being between 10-20 billion years of age, with the most likely time being about 14-17 billion years of our time. They say that there is no way to reconcile the Bible to the factual evidence, and therefore they choose to ignore at least this portion of the Bible, dismissing it as a fable or a story Moses merely inserted to answer questions from an unenlightened people wandering in the wilderness. Since they tend not to be Christians or Jews and generally do not recognize the Bible as being the word of God, any biblical evidence to the contrary is generally brushed aside and discounted, or is used to support their claim that the Bible cannot really be trusted as being true.
QUOTE]

 

Here I think that you are being more than a little unfair to those that do not support your interpretation of the Bible. There are many that do not hold to any sort of literal six day creation and do not discount the spiritual messages convied by the text. They do the same thing with the six day creation that the YEC's do with all of the flat earth and geo-centric verses, look at them as not literal facts but look for a deeper meaning.

 
 
Upvote 0
Wowee! This is obviously a topic of interest to many on this board.
Since God is outside of time, 24 hrs, millions, even billions of years or more mean nothing to him. Mabye many people don't like the idea of the earth being millions or billions of years old because they suddenly think of secular scientists and their theories. I personally believe in an old Earth, but I've come to realize the more I dig in and read, not only the Bible mind you, that there is so much I don't know. The entire universe is an amazing and mysterious creation! There is so much we will never know unless it shall be revealed to us when we meet The Creator of it all.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Art Vandalay
I'm curious what others think on this one especially since I'm new to this site:
Did God create the earth in 6 - 24 hr. periods, or over a much longer period of time. Was the term "days" just a term used to break up the periods of when things were created e.g. light and dark seperated, water, etc.
What are your thoughts?

I think it was 6 literal days, but it could certainly have been some indefinite period of time (millions of billions of years by our current means of reckoning). It's quite irrelevant, IMO.
 
Upvote 0

SUNSTONE

Christian Warrior
Sep 2, 2002
8,785
213
49
Cocoa Village
Visit site
✟18,200.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Originally posted by Sky77
The earth is billions of years old, not 6000 years old. And it was not a literal six days. Science proves that it was billions of years.

God could have made the earth as old as he wanted.

It was believed that the grand canyon took millions of years, but in recent years scientist believe it took place in a matter of minutes or hours. I am not sure which, but a very fast time.
 
Upvote 0

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
48
Visit site
✟12,690.00
Faith
Atheist
t was believed that the grand canyon took millions of years, but in recent years scientist believe it took place in a matter of minutes or hours. I am not sure which, but a very fast time.

  I'm sure he did. Creationists have been trying to say this for many decades. They claim that flood runoff did it.

  Of course, they're wrong. As anyone can show using a waterhose and some dirt. If you let the water run gently over the dirt, it tends to cut a meandering path (like the grand canyon) and gently (and slowly) wears it's path deeper and deeper.

   If, on the other hand, you tighten the nozzle and blast high pressure water out (as flood runoff would do, and would be needed to cut that much rock so quickly), you get straight lines.

 
 
Upvote 0

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Originally posted by LewisWildermuth:
Here I think that you are being more than a little unfair to those that do not support your interpretation of the Bible. There are many that do not hold to any sort of literal six day creation and do not discount the spiritual messages convied by the text. They do the same thing with the six day creation that the YEC's do with all of the flat earth and geo-centric verses, look at them as not literal facts but look for a deeper meaning.

Lewis, I did not intend to offend you by setting out the most common interpretations of what the Bible may mean by the days of creation. Which of the interpretations did you find to be "more than a little unfair to those that do not support your interpretation of the Bible"? Or does any interpretation of the Bible offend you? By the way, which interpretation was "my" interpretation (which you apparently found especially objectionable)? And do any of the theories I set out reflect your own personal opinion? If so, which one(s)? If not, what is your opinion?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

drom

Active Member
Sep 7, 2002
46
1
40
Visit site
✟199.00
lol people are so funny, no matter how much proof that comes out about the earth being billions of years old, which is true the universe is billions of years old 14 billion. alot will not believe it, they only want to believe what is in a book called the bible,  you can even look at pictures of stars on our Universe being made and going super nova but hey if they only want to believe a book at some GUY wrote.  Know days people think the same way people did in the middle ages, they think if someone crazy happens or if some kind of miracle happens they say god did it. The only difference in todays world people are not killing people cause they don't believe the way they do, oh wait thats what bin laden is doing, The Universe was born with a BIG BANG and it throw gas and matter outward and started making everything we see in the Universe today, But everyone is bigheaded and don't want to believe nothing other than a BOOK called the bible.
 
Upvote 0

LewisWildermuth

Senior Veteran
May 17, 2002
2,526
128
51
Bloomington, Illinois
✟11,875.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Originally posted by Sinai
Lewis, I did not intend to offend you by setting out the most common interpretations of what the Bible may mean by the days of creation. Which of the interpretations did you find to be "more than a little unfair to those that do not support your interpretation of the Bible"? Or does any interpretation of the Bible offend you? By the way, which interpretation was "my" interpretation (which you apparently found especially objectionable)? And do any of the theories I set out reflect your own personal opinion? If so, which one(s)? If not, what is your opinion?

Well, you tried to lump any reading that would allow for a scientific veiw of the world as people ignoring what the Bible says.

How about this view... The bible is about spiritual truths and is ment to be read as a *gasp* spiritual document. Maybe, just maybe it is not ment to be a science book *gasp again* or even a history book *even bigger gasp* but a how to save your soul book.

I do not ignore what the Bible has to say, but I also do not try to shoe horn the universe and all of nature into it either. I believe the bible is about spiritual truths and human weaknesses and has everything to with ones soul, but little to do with how the universe works or even how history actualy happened.
 
Upvote 0

Wildfire

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2002
454
1
Visit site
✟954.00
If you are looking for insight on <how and why> God created the heavens and the earth, read the book of Enoch.

chapter 24-32 explains the creation.

chapter 33 says:

And I appointed the eighth day also, that the eighth day should be the first-created after my work, and that the first seven years revolve in the form of the seven thousand, and that at the beginning of the eighth thousand there should be a time of not-counting, endless, with neither years nor months nor weeks nor days nor hours.

And now, Enoch, all that I have told you, all that you have understood, all that you have seen of heavenly things, all that you have seens on earth, all that I have written in books by my great wisdom, all these things I have devised and created from the uppermost foundations to the lower and to the end, and there is no counsellor nor inheritor to my counsellor.

I am self-eternal, not made with hands, and without change.

My thought is with the counsellor, (holy ghost) my wisdom and my word are made (Jesus Christ) and my eyes observe all things; how they stand here and there and tremble with terror.

If I turn away my face, then all things will be destroyed.

And apply your mind, Enoch, and know him who is speaking to you, and take thence the books which you yourself have written.

And I give you Samuil and Raguil (angels) who led you up, and the books, and go down to earth, and tell your sons all that I have told you, and all that you have seen, from the lower heaven up to my throne, and all the troops.

For I created all forces, and there is none that resists me or that does not subject himself to me. For all subject themselves to my monarchy, and lobour for my sole rule.

Give them the books of the handwriting, and they will read them and will know me the creator of all things, and will understand how there is no other God but me.

And let them distribute the books of your handwriting-children to children, generation to generation, nations to nations.

And I will give you, Enoch, my intercessor, the archistratege Michael, for the handwritings of your fathers Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahaleleel and Jared your father.

Wildfire
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wildfire

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2002
454
1
Visit site
✟954.00
Sunstone, no unfortunately our "church fathers" of long ago, did not feel that Enochs writings were appropriate and excluded them from the bible. This is explained in the link below, that will lead you to the Secrets of Enoch:

http://www.bible2000.org/lostbooks/enochs2.htm

If you click the word HOME at the bottom of this page, you will find his other writings.

Wildfire

P.S. thanks!
 
Upvote 0

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Originally posted by LewisWildermuth:
Well, you tried to lump any reading that would allow for a scientific veiw of the world as people ignoring what the Bible says.


From reading your posts, Lewis, I could not tell whether you took the time to fully read all of my post.

The first position presented (which is the one you obviously read and responded to) summarizes the viewpoint of "those who ignore what the Bible says, or who disbelieve it or discount it. They point out that scientific measurements place the age of the universe as being between 10-20 billion years of age, with the most likely time being about 14-17 billion years of our time."

Next is summarized the principal young earth theories of "those who believe the Bible means six consecutive 24-hour periods of time (i.e., 144 hours total), and [who] choose to ignore, disbelieve or discount the scientific evidence to the contrary."

Then come the three principal positions I have found of those persons who think that mainstream scientific evidence is not contrary to what the Bible says, and they are presented as theories 3, 4 and 5.

If you are suggesting that there should be a subcategory under the first position presented for those who believe the Bible to be God's word and to be inspired--but only with regard to spiritual matters, and that anything it says about other things (such as science or history) should be ignored, taken with a grain of salt, or some similar attitude, you may well be correct. How would you suggest phrasing such a subcategory?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Originally posted by Wildfire:
our "church fathers" of long ago, did not feel that Enochs writings were appropriate and excluded them from the bible....If you click the word HOME at the bottom of this page, you will find his other writings.


Actually, Wildfire, biblical scholars do not believe the book of Enoch was actually written by Enoch, but was rather written by some unknown person or persons who borrowed the more famous and revered name of the patriarch in Genesis.
 
Upvote 0