Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I am not super versed in YEC thought, so take my point of view with a load of salt! However, I would say no, that is not likely. The scripture are clear about the creation of the Universe. So, if it were a cataclysmic event it would have had to destroy everything - every atom in the universe. If there were previous creations we would have no ability to detect them.I’m new to this thread and haven’t read everything. However, I have heard and read several times that בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית can be translated as “In a beginning.” Lately, I watch a presentation by Randall Carlson who claims that we might be the seventh “rebirth” of human civilization since the world began. The other six were destroyed by cataclysmic events. I have no doubt that the genealogies of the Bible are correct. Could previous biospheres with humans existed before Adam and Eve that have left little or no trace?
The indefinite translation of Genesis 1:1 does not require prior creations. It simply suspends the question of how long heaven and earth were present before God began creating (giving form to that which was formless).I’m new to this thread and haven’t read everything. However, I have heard and read several times that בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית can be translated as “In a beginning.” Lately, I watch a presentation by Randall Carlson who claims that we might be the seventh “rebirth” of human civilization since the world began. The other six were destroyed by cataclysmic events. I have no doubt that the genealogies of the Bible are correct. Could previous biospheres with humans existed before Adam and Eve that have left little or no trace?
I understand your point, and it also addresses the possibility of a gap between the first and second chapters of Genesis. I was just trying to see if there was a possibility that the line of Adam was 6000 years old, but other humans were here before, without saying the Bible account was wrong or mythical.I am not super versed in YEC thought, so take my point of view with a load of salt! However, I would say no, that is not likely. The scripture are clear about the creation of the Universe. So, if it were a cataclysmic event it would have had to destroy everything - every atom in the universe. If there were previous creations we would have no ability to detect them.
Thanks.The indefinite translation of Genesis 1:1 does not require prior creations. It simply suspends the question of how long heaven and earth were present before God began creating (giving form to that which was formless).
And you can consider translations such as the following:
Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.
When God began to create, the earth was [already] formless and empty.
That's all. It need not require some prehistoric creation.
I understand your point, and it also addresses the possibility of a gap between the first and second chapters of Genesis.
Oh yes. Well you could just observe that Genesis chapter 1 never mentions Adam and Eve. So it's quite easy to argue for that possibility of other people before them.I was just trying to see if there was a possibility that the line of Adam was 6000 years old, but other humans were here before, without saying the Bible account was wrong or mythical.
Thanks.
I have struggled with the idea of how old humans are until pretty recently. Much of the "evidence" for archaic or old species of Homo are greatly exaggerated by scientists. Answers in Genesis has a pretty good article about it here: AiG ArticleI understand your point, and it also addresses the possibility of a gap between the first and second chapters of Genesis. I was just trying to see if there was a possibility that the line of Adam was 6000 years old, but other humans were here before, without saying the Bible account was wrong or mythical.
I haven't watched it, but I will this evening. Thanks.Yes. Well gap theory has been around for some time.
Oh yes. Well you could just observe that Genesis chapter 1 never mentions Adam and Eve. So it's quite easy to argue for that possibility of other people before them.
Have you watched lectures by John Walton on the lost world of Adam and Eve?
Great article. I just read it. Are these “archaic humans” the ones Cain was worried about?I have struggled with the idea of how old humans are until pretty recently. Much of the "evidence" for archaic or old species of Homo are greatly exaggerated by scientists. Answers in Genesis has a pretty good article about it here: AiG Article
I don't think so, mostly the other man-like creatures around at the time would have been apes, even if they were bipedal. I believe the people that he was afraid of would have been his relatives by birth - brothers, sisters, nephews, etc.Great article. I just read it. Are these “archaic humans” the ones Cain was worried about?
Answers in Genesis is terribly unreliable in both matters of science, as well as Bible:I have struggled with the idea of how old humans are until pretty recently. Much of the "evidence" for archaic or old species of Homo are greatly exaggerated by scientists. Answers in Genesis has a pretty good article about it here: AiG Article
As with everything, one must be judicious and weight the evidence we are reading.Answers in Genesis is terribly unreliable in both matters of science, as well as Bible:
I wasn't talking about the age of the Earth, I was talking about evidence of alleged "archaic" Homo species being exaggerated.And nobody is exaggerating the age of the earth.
And that's debatable from a Christian perspective.It simply is ancient.
Lord Jesus spoke that "hard saying" because they first hardened their hearts toward him. However, before he said "John 6:53-58," Lord Jesus previously plainly revealed to them how they may have eternal life - which they would not accept - as follows:
John 6:32-47 (WEB)
32 Jesus therefore said to them, “Most certainly, I tell you, it wasn’t Moses who gave you the bread out of heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread out of heaven.
33 For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.”
34 They said therefore to him, “Lord, always give us this bread.”
35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will not be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36
But I told you that you have seen me, and yet you don’t believe.
37 All those whom the Father gives me will come to me. He who comes to me I will in no way throw out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.
39 This is the will of my Father who sent me, that of all he has given to me I should lose nothing, but should raise him up at the last day. 40 For this is the will of the one who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son, and believes in him, should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”
41 The Jews therefore murmured concerning him, because he said, “I am the bread which came down out of heaven.” 42 They said, “Isn’t this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How then does he say, ‘I have come down out of heaven?’”
43 Therefore Jesus answered them, “Don’t murmur among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up in the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, ‘They will all be taught by God.’ [Isaiah 54:13] Therefore everyone who hears from the Father and has learned, comes to me. 46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except he who is from God. He has seen the Father. 47 Most certainly, I tell you, he who believes in me has eternal life.
Notice that, to these hard-hearted Jews who refused to believe what he stated, he made this hard saying to condemn them in "John 6:53-58."
If Lord Jesus had truly meant that we have to drink his blood and eat his flesh to have eternal life, then such would be taught all through the New Testament. But that is not what is taught. Rather, the Gospel is all about coming to Lord Jesus and believing in Him as Lord and Savior to be possess eternal life just as Lord Jesus plainly taught in "John 6:32-47."
John 6:35 (WEB)
35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will not be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
John 5:24 (WEB) 24 “Most certainly I tell you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life, and doesn’t come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
How do we possess Eternal Life, according to the Gospel?
John 3:16 (WEB) 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but may have eternal life.
John 3:36 (WEB) 36 One who believes in the Son has eternal life, but one who disobeys the Son won’t see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.
Either eternal life is by eating drinking his blood and eating his flesh to have eternal life
OR
Eternal life is by hearing the Gospel and believing in Lord Jesus.
The New Testament bears testimony throughout that it is by hearing the Gospel and believing in Lord Jesus that we possess Eternal Life.
Acts 20:20-21 … 20 I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, teaching you publicly and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus.
You canot benefit spiritually by eating flesh and drinking blood; rather, salvation is by coming to Lord Jesus and believing in him. This is Spiritual.
John 6:63 (WEB) It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
I will take the archaeologists wrod over novices, but I am curious so go to it and set it up.Let review one of those chipped stone tools together - I'm not just gonna take what some archaeologists says...I want to see the data.
I am still curious of how you are going to set this up but go for it.Lets look at one of those chipped stone tools together and see who they extracted an age from it. I"m not going to take their word for it - I want to see what they and how they based it.
Does anybody have proof that the earth and the entire universe really is 6,000 - ish years old beyond the usual arguments that science has debunked over and over again? Arguments like the rocks in the Grand Canyon or some other such weak examples? I’m looking for reputable scientists who’ve written peer reviewed papers on the subject and gained the support of other reputable scientists?
There really is no difference in the two in terms of the sciences. If the bones are not old, then the layers of the earth in which they are present, are not old either.I wasn't talking about the age of the Earth, I was talking about evidence of alleged "archaic" Homo species being exaggerated.
I watched Dr. John Walton, and it is very well done and interesting. The biggest problem I have is that he claims that Adam’s care of Eden is priesthood. That would mean that he was a priest to others in the garden. So, were more people than Adam and Eve sent out of the garden?Yes. Well gap theory has been around for some time.
Oh yes. Well you could just observe that Genesis chapter 1 never mentions Adam and Eve. So it's quite easy to argue for that possibility of other people before them.
Have you watched lectures by John Walton on the lost world of Adam and Eve?
I haven't seen anything conclusively dated prior to Creation (approx 6000 years ago).I will take the archaeologists wrod over novices, but I am curious so go to it and set it up.
I am still curious of how you are going to set this up but go for it.
The priests role, first and foremost is to "work and keep" the sanctuary. It is more of a service to God than it is to people. At least for Adam and Eve as the text indicates that they were kicked out of the garden prior to having any children or prior to interaction with others.I watched Dr. John Walton, and it is very well done and interesting. The biggest problem I have is that he claims that Adam’s care of Eden is priesthood. That would mean that he was a priest to others in the garden. So, were more people than Adam and Eve sent out of the garden?
Here are some, but there are many more, supporting passages that parallel the Tabernacle in particular, and priests of the tabernacle, to Eden or Genesis, and Adam and Eve:I watched Dr. John Walton, and it is very well done and interesting. The biggest problem I have is that he claims that Adam’s care of Eden is priesthood. That would mean that he was a priest to others in the garden. So, were more people than Adam and Eve sent out of the garden?
I read that AiG article and I'm curious what you like about it.I have struggled with the idea of how old humans are until pretty recently. Much of the "evidence" for archaic or old species of Homo are greatly exaggerated by scientists. Answers in Genesis has a pretty good article about it here: AiG Article
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?