Does Scripture account for the age of dynosaurs?

Jason0047 said:

Not at all, my friend. There is no mention of a previous world in Isaiah 14:12-19 and or Ezekiel 28:12-19.

Isaiah 14:12 is prophetic. The devil is not kicked out (i.e. not fallen) from Heaven yet because it is implied that he visited Job before the Lord in heaven because (a) the text says, "Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD."; And (b) Satan told the Lord where he came from by saying, "From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it." (See Job 2:1-2).

Also, in Revelation 12, we read about the coming of the Messiah and His resurrection and or His final ascension,

"And she [i.e. Israel] brought forth a man child [i.e. Jesus], who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God [i.e. Christ's resurrection and or final ascension], and to his throne." (Revelation 12:5).

Israel flees to the Mountains During the Midpoint of the Future 7 Year Tribulation:

"And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days." (Revelation 12:6).

During the Time of the Last Half of the Tribulation (Sometime after the Midpoint of the Tribulation)
There is a War in Heaven and Satan is Cast out (i.e. His Fall):

7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." (Revelation 12:7-10).

So when Isaiah 14:12 says, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!" It is in reference to his future fall from Heaven in Revelation 12:7-10. So Isaiah 14:12 is in reference to Satan weakening the nations of today and not of some previous world before the six day creation.

As for Ezekiel 28:12-19:

Verses 13-14 say that Lucifer was in the Garden of Eden and then it references how he had many beautiful gem stones that adorned him and how he was upon the holy mountain of God. This is in reference to how he was glorious and beautiful at one time, but verse 15 talks about how he was perfect until iniquity was found within him.

The latter half of verse 17 is how God will lay Satan before kings in the future at the Judgment. This is not talking about some past judgment or anything. There is only one Judgment.



Sorry, the Gap Theory is not even hinted at in the book of Genesis. Again, it would say, God created the Heavens and the Earths if there was an Earth before the Earth that is now. But it doesn't say that.



No. 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not in reference to a world before the Earth existed.

"The heavens (sky or atmosphere) that were of old" and the "world that then was" is in reference to the "old world" before the global flood involving Noah, his family, and the Ark. If you were to skip back to the previous chapter (same verse number), you would see the context say,

5 "And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;"

Okay, first, God spared not the OLD WORLD but saved Noah, the eight person a preacher of righteousness bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly. We read about this in Genesis 6 - through - Genesis 7. The Old World is the world before the global flood.

Second, the global flood involving Noah and the Ark was an example to all who should live ungodly thereafter. This is what verse 6 says. Noah, and his family survived so as to pass the news unto their generations of children about the global flood and how it was an example to all who should live ungodly. If this was talking about the world before, it wouldn't make any sense. In your view, nobody would have survived to tell the story. So 2 Peter 2:5-6 is the context of 2 Peter 3:5-7; And it is clearly talking about the global flood.



"Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;" (Hebrews 1:2).

Scripture is speaking ahead of it's time scientifically. It is talking about the planets. Jesus made the planets (i.e. worlds).

But if there was a mention of a world before the Earth existed, Hebrews 1 missed that opportunity.

For it says in verse 10,

"And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:" (Hebrews 1:10).

We see above here that the Lord from the beginning has laid the foundation of the earth, etc. and there is no mention of some past world before our Earth came into existence.

Hebrews 11:3 says,
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

Again, the world "worlds" is in reference to the planets within our universe.

"By faith we understand that the entire universe was formed at God's command, that what we now see did not come from anything that can be seen." (Hebrews 11:3) (NLT).



The Bible does not hint at a gap theory within this verse.



Nothing here in Job 38 about a world existing before our Earth. It says in verse 4 how God laid the foundations of our Earth. In fact, the morning stars sang with joy when the foundations of our Earth were being fastened. The whole of God's speech to Job in Job 38 - through - Job 41 is in reference to the creation of our Earth. Nothing is mentioned or even hinted at involving another previous world within these chapters.



There are tons of scientific evidences for a Young Earth, too.
But I look to the Bible first to determine my world view and not Science.



Yes, these are the generations of the heavens and the EARTH (singular), and not plural. The heavens is plural because Scripture mentions that there are three Heavens.

Jesus said that no man ascends to Heaven except Himself, when He said,

"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." (John 3:13 KJV)​

In other words, no man has ascended physically to Heaven but Jesus (i.e. the Son of Man).

Yeah, but what about Elijah?

I believe confusion arises on this point because people do not understand that there are:

Three Heavens​

The Scripture mentions three heavens (2 Corinthians 12:2), not just one!

The First Heaven:

The first heaven is earth's atmosphere where birds fly (Genesis 1:20, Jeremiah 4:25;34:20,Lamentations 4:19, Zephaniah 1:3). One of the Hebrew words for 'heaven' is shamayim. This same word is translated as 'sky' in the Scripture, as can be seen by comparing Genesis 7:3, "fowls also of the air," with Genesis 7:23, "fowl of the heaven." The word 'sky' and 'heaven' are used interchangeably from the same Hebrew word (Psalm 8:8). So the first heaven is synonymous with 'heights' or 'elevations.'

Here are other examples to illustrate the first heaven. Exodus 19:20 says the Lord was on top of Mount Sinai when he called Moses up there, and God describes Mount Sinai as 'heaven' (Exodus 20:22, Deuteronomy 4:36). Here, everything above the ground is called 'heaven'.

Another example of the first heaven is in Amos 9:1-3, where God states that at the time of this judgment, nobody will be able to flee away (verse 1), even "though they climb up to heaven" (verse 2). This "heaven" is defined in the next verse, verse 3, as climbing to the top of Mount Carmel.

Another example is where the Scripture speaks of the "dew of heaven" (Genesis 27:28,39,Deuteronomy 33:28, Daniel 4:15-33; 5:21). The first heaven, from which dew comes, means the atmosphere, where the clouds and the wind roam. Therefore, everything above the ground is called 'heaven."

Another Hebrew word for the first heaven is 'shachaq.' This same word for heaven (Psalm 89:6,37) is also translated as 'sky' or 'skies' (Deuteronomy 33:26; Job 37:18; Psalm 18:11), and as 'clouds' (Job 35:5; 36:28; Psalm 36:5; 68:34, Pro. 3:20; 8:28).

The Second Heaven:

The second heaven is outer space where the planets and stars exist (Genesis 1:14-17; 15:5;22:17;26:4, Deuteronomy 1:10; 17:3; Psalm 8:3, Jeremiah 8:2; Matthew 24:29). Usually the term "host of heaven" or "firmament of the heaven" is used to describe this second heaven.

The Third Heaven:

The third heaven is literally called "the third heaven" in 2 Corinthians 12:2. This third heaven is what Christ calls his "Father's house" (John 14:2), and both Christ and the Apostle Paul calls it "paradise" (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, Revelation 2:7). This is where God and the heavenly sanctuary exist (1 Peter 3:22). This third heaven is also known as the "heaven of heavens" (Deuteronomy 10:14; 1 Kings 8:27, 2 Chronicles 2:6; 6:18, Nehemiah 9:6, Psalms 148:4), "The heavenly Jerusalem" (Galatians 4: 26; Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 3:12), the "kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 25:1, James 2:5), the "eternal kingdom" (2 Peter 1:11), the "eternal inheritance" (1 Peter. 1:4,Hebrews 9:15), and the "better country" (Hebrews 11:14,16). The fact that there are more than one 'heaven' can be shown by Psalm 115:16, "The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S." There are obviously two different 'heavens' being addressed in this one verse.

Since Elijah could not have gone to the heaven of God's throne, then to which heaven did he go? He was not taken to God's heavenly throne (as some imagine). He was actually taken into this earth's atmosphere, the first heaven. There could be no whirlwind in any other place but in the atmosphere surrounding this earth.


Source:
Elijah, Enoch, and Moses
Important Note: Although I quoted part of this article to help explain the three heavens, I do not agree with their interpretation of on Enoch. I believe Enoch was translated or spiritually taken by God and did not see death (as the Scriptures say). So not all the views expressed at this website reflect my views on the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

Gen.1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

Everything God created was good. Never in the condition as described in verse 2 above. So what happened between verses one and two?
400,000 year old human DNA

The oldest human DNA ever recovered is throwing scientists for a loop: The 400,000-year-old genetic material comes from bones that have been linked to Neanderthals in Spain — but its signature is most similar to that of a different ancient human population from Siberia, known as the Denisovans.The researchers who did the analysis said their findings show an "unexpected link" between two of our extinct cousin species.

Follow-up studies could crack the mystery — not only for the early humans who lived in the cave complex known as Sima de los Huesos (Spanish for "Pit of Bones"), but for other mysterious populations in the Pleistocene epoch."Ancient DNA sequencing techniques have become sensitive enough to warrant further investigation of DNA survival at sites where Middle Pleistocene hominins are found," the research team, led by Matthias Meyer and Svante Pääbo of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, wrote in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature. ("Hominin" is the currently accepted term for humans and our close evolutionary cousins.)As anthropologists are getting better at extracting DNA from ancient bones, genetic mysteries are cropping up more frequently: Last month, researchers at scientific meetings talked about not-yet-published findings that hinted at interbreeding among Neanderthals, Denisovans and previously unknown populations of early humans.A new standard

The age of the mitochondrial DNA analyzed for the Nature study sets a new standard: Researchers used statistical analysis of the DNA and other samples to estimate that the material was roughly 400,000 years old. That meshed with the estimated age for similar DNA extracted from bear bones found in the same cave.More than 6,000 human fossils, representing about 28 individuals, have been recovered from the Sima de los Huesos site, a hard-to-get-to cave chamber that lies about 100 feet (30 meters) below the surface in northern Spain. The fossils are unusually well-preserved, thanks in part to the undisturbed cave's constant cool temperature and high

For the complete article:

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/400-000-year-old-human-dna-adds-new-tangle-our-2D11690925


Pre-Adam human bones found

Hi friends,We know there is no such thing as evolution of one species of creature to another as has been proven completely in error many times over. The following article by Bill Sardi is not posted here to promote evolution at all, but rather, to prover there have been amny ages of life on the earth before the age we now live in, beginning with Adam and Eve. With that in mind, it is understood why we have added his article here for its ancient historic value, in an effort to help us understand hidden mysteries of God when we discover them and to share them with the rest of you.Is "Flat-Faced Man" Your Ancestor?by: Bill SardiWhen are paleontologists going to stop digging up chimpanzee bones and calling them your ancestors?It’s yet another fossil discovery, one of at least five in the past year, that The Associated Press says "may redefine evolution." It’s "Flat-faced man," (Kenyananthropus platyops), found in sandstone west of Lake Turkana in Kenya by Meave Leakey of the Leakey Foundation [Nature Volume 410, page 440, 2001].

News sources have headlined the announcement worldwide even though no other scientists have had an opportunity to examine the 30 fossilized bone fragments from just one skull to confirm Leakey’s claim that it’s a new genus and species of pre-humans (hominids), and even though the dating of the fossil is questionable.When you read the news reports carefully you see how eager scientists and reporters are to turn speculation into scientific fact. The Boston Globe headline reads: "New fossil adds an early branch to the human family tree." But in the Associated Press story, Meave Leakey, who discovered Flat-faced man, is quoted as saying the chances are 50-50 this species could have been an early ancestor of human beings. "I don’t have any scientific grounds to say that this is directly anecestral.

It certainly is a branch of the human family tree," says Leakey in the Los Angeles Times. That means, in her mind, it is assumed to be a pre-human, and under the assumption that humans evolved from apes, it could be an ancestor of Homo sapiens, or, like one of the many new rival hominids, it may have lived millions of years ago but became extinct and died out without an ancestral link to modern humans.Readers have to scan news reports for the assumptions and qualifiers. A commentary in Nature Magazine by Daniel Lieberman of the Department of Paleontology, the George Washington University, says the new fossil is "presumed to have evolved..." [Nature, March 22, 2001] The Washington Post report says: "If it turns out that the newly discovered species did eventually evolve into modern humans...."

That’s a big "if" that will likely take years to determine.The Los Angeles Times admits: "Only about 30 fragments of skull and jaw were found, but no long bones or ribs. So much about the creature is still guesswork." The Boston Globe says: "It is difficult to establish that flat-faced man was even a new species, because there are simply too few fossils available for comparison." A commentary in Nature Magazine admitted that of the 30 fossil fragments found, only 2 have been actually assigned to flat-faced man. So what are readers to believe? According to the data, Flat-faced man is/isn’t an ancestor of modern man?The dating of Flat-face man is also in question

Daniel E. Lieberman, Department of Anthropology, George Washington University, says "These fossils were all found in deposits reliably dated to between 3.5 million and 3.2 million years ago." [Nature, March 22, 2001] Paleontologists continue to date fossils by the layer of earth they are found in, and the layer of the earth by the fossils typically found there, which is circular reasoning. Scientists maintain sedimentary layers were laid down at a constant rate that can be measured and that fossils found at the bottom of the heap are the oldest and most primitive and are millions of years old, and precede man (called uniformitarianism).

Again, this is an assumption.New dating techniques are now being employed rather than just relying on the rock strata. Recently two geologists, from the University of California at Berkeley, studied Java man (Homo erectus). The original Java Man was dug up in 1893 by Eugene Dubois, a Dutchman. The UC Berkeley researchers, using the newer dating techniques, estimated Java Man was no more than 50,000 years old, not the 1.8 million years previously claimed! [New York Times, January 10, 2001]

To totally confound modern science, miners have unearthed a man-made metal sphere from the Ottosdal Mines in South Africa, whose rock strata is estimated to be 2.8 billion years old. David Childress, author of Technology of the Gods [Adventures Unlimited Press, 2000], says: "Given the distinct possibility that uniformitarian geology and dating are completly erroneous, objects that would initially appear to have a startingly ancient date, say hundreds of thousands or millions of years, might actually be of much more recent manufacture. While it seems most of them are authentic, they are probably closer to tens of thousands of years old, rather than millions of years old."Scientists have repeatedly documented tools and human fossils in the geological record, even into the Pre-Cambrian age, long before scientists indicate man appeared. [Forbidden Archaeology, The Hidden History of the Human Race, Torchlight Publications, 1994]Reporters Don’t Question Science

Paleontologists, who appear to be seeking headlines, undergo little or no scrutiny from science journalists throughout the world, who themselves appear eager for a story. For example, paleontologists continue to employ archaic fossil dating methods. When French researchers recently reported they had found human remains of 5 individuals that date back 6 million years, the widely heralded "Millennium man" (Orrorin tugenensis), they admitted they had not performed any dating on the fossils, but indicated the fossils had been obtained from "rock strata .....previously proven to show an age of 6 million years." [Reuters, December 4, 2000]

More assumptions and circular reasoning that go unchallenged by reporters."There is only one species of humans today, but there were two or more throughout prehistory until Neanderthals became extinct about 35,000 years ago," says Guy Gugliotta, science reporter for the Washington Post. But of course, Gugliotta forgot to tell readers these are still unproven theories. Gugliotta says Lucy (Australopithecus afarensis), previously thought to be the oldest pre-human ancestor, was "a bipedal forager about 3 ½ feet tall, lived between 3.5 million and 2.8 million years ago and had anantomical characteristics about halfway between those of apes and humans."

This is conjecture. Lucy was made up from just a small pile of bone fragments. Recently the National Geographic commissioned 4 artists to sketch what they believed 2-million year old Homo habilis looked like from castings of seven bone fragments they were given to examine. Each artist produced radically different renditions of Homo habilis, all without body hair. [National Geographic, March 2000] Yet there is no way of knowing if Homo habilis was hairy or not. Drawings of Neanderthal man, who supposedly existed only hundreds of thousands of years ago, are shown in biology books with body hair. So were man’s ancestors hairy like apes or not?Paleontology’s frauds and blunders

Look at the blunders and outright fraud that have been reported in the just the past year in fossil studies.April 7, 2000: The National Geographic Society admitted that a fossil hailed as evidence that birds descended from dinosaurs was a composite of two different animals.April 21, 2000: A computer scan of a dinosaur fossil, which researchers had previosuly claimed had a heart and therefore was warm-blooded, revealed the heart to be nothing more than a clump of minerals that misled researchers. [Los Angeles Times, April 21, 2000]November 9, 2000: Tohoku Paleolithic Institute in Japan fired archaeologist Shinichi Fujimura after he was caught planting stone artifacts, a practice that had been going on for two decades.November 26, 2000: Canadian scientists indicate that an earlier report claiming a reptile fossil had wings was erroneous.

The "feathers" were found to be scales.December 8, 2000: 200-million year old fossil on display at the National Museum in Wales was found to be a forgery.Paleontology doesn’t have a very good track record to build upon. Recall the following blunders and frauds that were published in biology textbooks for decades.Piltdown man: a combination of a modern human skull and orang-utan jaw, revealed as a fraud in 1953, 40 years after its discovery. Nebraska man: based upon one tooth found in 1921, which actually belonged to a pig-like animal. Drawings of a hairy animal were erroneously published. Java man: Admittedly its teeth were probably

from a orang-utan and its long-leg bone was more recent than its skull. Lucy: French researchers no longer consider this specimen, found in 1974, to be a direct human ancestor. [Associated Press, February 7, 2001 Neanderthal man: once shown in biology textbooks as the missing link and estimated to have lived 100,000-200,000 years ago, it was thought to be an extinct species that was not a descendant of modern man. But the discovery of a fossil with combined features of Homo sapiens and Neanderthal, coupled with discoveries of bone flutes, spears and other tools, appears to indicate Neanderthals were human contemporaries of modern man.

[Scientific American, November 8, 1999]Some scientists have, for some time now, believed that man came from a common ancestor. Using DNA mutation rates to date fossils, researchers believe that the first humans (not hominids), "Adam and Eve," lived 100,000-200,000 years ago. But recently researchers recognized they had miscalculated the rate of mitochondrial DNA mutation in fossils of early humans. Instead of having existed over 100,000 years ago, the new data indicates "Eve" may have lived only 6000 years ago, a scenario that amazingly correlates with the Biblical dating of creation. [Science, Volume 279, page 28, 1998]Even though researchers use the veil of science for their beliefs, they often are nothing more than that. So the scientists have their "belief systems," and those who don’t buy into Darwin’s evolutionary scheme have theirs.March 24, 2001Bill Sardi writes from Diamond Bar, California.



Quasar92

Jason0047 said:

Not at all, my friend. There is no mention of a previous world in Isaiah 14:12-19 and or Ezekiel 28:12-19.

Isaiah 14:12 is prophetic. The devil is not kicked out (i.e. not fallen) from Heaven yet because it is implied that he visited Job before the Lord in heaven because (a) the text says, "Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD."; And (b) Satan told the Lord where he came from by saying, "From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it." (See Job 2:1-2).

Also, in Revelation 12, we read about the coming of the Messiah and His resurrection and or His final ascension,

"And she [i.e. Israel] brought forth a man child [i.e. Jesus], who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God [i.e. Christ's resurrection and or final ascension], and to his throne." (Revelation 12:5).

Israel flees to the Mountains During the Midpoint of the Future 7 Year Tribulation:

"And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days." (Revelation 12:6).

During the Time of the Last Half of the Tribulation (Sometime after the Midpoint of the Tribulation)
There is a War in Heaven and Satan is Cast out (i.e. His Fall):

7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." (Revelation 12:7-10).

So when Isaiah 14:12 says, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!" It is in reference to his future fall from Heaven in Revelation 12:7-10. So Isaiah 14:12 is in reference to Satan weakening the nations of today and not of some previous world before the six day creation.

As for Ezekiel 28:12-19:

Verses 13-14 say that Lucifer was in the Garden of Eden and then it references how he had many beautiful gem stones that adorned him and how he was upon the holy mountain of God. This is in reference to how he was glorious and beautiful at one time, but verse 15 talks about how he was perfect until iniquity was found within him.

The latter half of verse 17 is how God will lay Satan before kings in the future at the Judgment. This is not talking about some past judgment or anything. There is only one Judgment.



Sorry, the Gap Theory is not even hinted at in the book of Genesis. Again, it would say, God created the Heavens and the Earths if there was an Earth before the Earth that is now. But it doesn't say that.



No. 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not in reference to a world before the Earth existed.

"The heavens (sky or atmosphere) that were of old" and the "world that then was" is in reference to the "old world" before the global flood involving Noah, his family, and the Ark. If you were to skip back to the previous chapter (same verse number), you would see the context say,

5 "And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;"

Okay, first, God spared not the OLD WORLD but saved Noah, the eight person a preacher of righteousness bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly. We read about this in Genesis 6 - through - Genesis 7. The Old World is the world before the global flood.

Second, the global flood involving Noah and the Ark was an example to all who should live ungodly thereafter. This is what verse 6 says. Noah, and his family survived so as to pass the news unto their generations of children about the global flood and how it was an example to all who should live ungodly. If this was talking about the world before, it wouldn't make any sense. In your view, nobody would have survived to tell the story. So 2 Peter 2:5-6 is the context of 2 Peter 3:5-7; And it is clearly talking about the global flood.



"Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;" (Hebrews 1:2).

Scripture is speaking ahead of it's time scientifically. It is talking about the planets. Jesus made the planets (i.e. worlds).

But if there was a mention of a world before the Earth existed, Hebrews 1 missed that opportunity.

For it says in verse 10,

"And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:" (Hebrews 1:10).

We see above here that the Lord from the beginning has laid the foundation of the earth, etc. and there is no mention of some past world before our Earth came into existence.

Hebrews 11:3 says,
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

Again, the world "worlds" is in reference to the planets within our universe.

"By faith we understand that the entire universe was formed at God's command, that what we now see did not come from anything that can be seen." (Hebrews 11:3) (NLT).



The Bible does not hint at a gap theory within this verse.



Nothing here in Job 38 about a world existing before our Earth. It says in verse 4 how God laid the foundations of our Earth. In fact, the morning stars sang with joy when the foundations of our Earth were being fastened. The whole of God's speech to Job in Job 38 - through - Job 41 is in reference to the creation of our Earth. Nothing is mentioned or even hinted at involving another previous world within these chapters.



There are tons of scientific evidences for a Young Earth, too.
But I look to the Bible first to determine my world view and not Science.



Yes, these are the generations of the heavens and the EARTH (singular), and not plural. The heavens is plural because Scripture mentions that there are three Heavens.

Jesus said that no man ascends to Heaven except Himself, when He said,

"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." (John 3:13 KJV)​

In other words, no man has ascended physically to Heaven but Jesus (i.e. the Son of Man).

Yeah, but what about Elijah?

I believe confusion arises on this point because people do not understand that there are:

Three Heavens​

The Scripture mentions three heavens (2 Corinthians 12:2), not just one!

The First Heaven:

The first heaven is earth's atmosphere where birds fly (Genesis 1:20, Jeremiah 4:25;34:20,Lamentations 4:19, Zephaniah 1:3). One of the Hebrew words for 'heaven' is shamayim. This same word is translated as 'sky' in the Scripture, as can be seen by comparing Genesis 7:3, "fowls also of the air," with Genesis 7:23, "fowl of the heaven." The word 'sky' and 'heaven' are used interchangeably from the same Hebrew word (Psalm 8:8). So the first heaven is synonymous with 'heights' or 'elevations.'

Here are other examples to illustrate the first heaven. Exodus 19:20 says the Lord was on top of Mount Sinai when he called Moses up there, and God describes Mount Sinai as 'heaven' (Exodus 20:22, Deuteronomy 4:36). Here, everything above the ground is called 'heaven'.

Another example of the first heaven is in Amos 9:1-3, where God states that at the time of this judgment, nobody will be able to flee away (verse 1), even "though they climb up to heaven" (verse 2). This "heaven" is defined in the next verse, verse 3, as climbing to the top of Mount Carmel.

Another example is where the Scripture speaks of the "dew of heaven" (Genesis 27:28,39,Deuteronomy 33:28, Daniel 4:15-33; 5:21). The first heaven, from which dew comes, means the atmosphere, where the clouds and the wind roam. Therefore, everything above the ground is called 'heaven."

Another Hebrew word for the first heaven is 'shachaq.' This same word for heaven (Psalm 89:6,37) is also translated as 'sky' or 'skies' (Deuteronomy 33:26; Job 37:18; Psalm 18:11), and as 'clouds' (Job 35:5; 36:28; Psalm 36:5; 68:34, Pro. 3:20; 8:28).

The Second Heaven:

The second heaven is outer space where the planets and stars exist (Genesis 1:14-17; 15:5;22:17;26:4, Deuteronomy 1:10; 17:3; Psalm 8:3, Jeremiah 8:2; Matthew 24:29). Usually the term "host of heaven" or "firmament of the heaven" is used to describe this second heaven.

The Third Heaven:

The third heaven is literally called "the third heaven" in 2 Corinthians 12:2. This third heaven is what Christ calls his "Father's house" (John 14:2), and both Christ and the Apostle Paul calls it "paradise" (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, Revelation 2:7). This is where God and the heavenly sanctuary exist (1 Peter 3:22). This third heaven is also known as the "heaven of heavens" (Deuteronomy 10:14; 1 Kings 8:27, 2 Chronicles 2:6; 6:18, Nehemiah 9:6, Psalms 148:4), "The heavenly Jerusalem" (Galatians 4: 26; Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 3:12), the "kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 25:1, James 2:5), the "eternal kingdom" (2 Peter 1:11), the "eternal inheritance" (1 Peter. 1:4,Hebrews 9:15), and the "better country" (Hebrews 11:14,16). The fact that there are more than one 'heaven' can be shown by Psalm 115:16, "The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S." There are obviously two different 'heavens' being addressed in this one verse.

Since Elijah could not have gone to the heaven of God's throne, then to which heaven did he go? He was not taken to God's heavenly throne (as some imagine). He was actually taken into this earth's atmosphere, the first heaven. There could be no whirlwind in any other place but in the atmosphere surrounding this earth.


Source:
Elijah, Enoch, and Moses
Important Note: Although I quoted part of this article to help explain the three heavens, I do not agree with their interpretation of on Enoch. I believe Enoch was translated or spiritually taken by God and did not see death (as the Scriptures say). So not all the views expressed at this website reflect my views on the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

An Old Earth Age/The Gap Theory

It is rare in the creation/evolution controversy to find issues on which both creationists and evolutionists agree. Generally speaking, the two world views are light-years apart. But there is one thing on which both sides agree: evolution is impossible if the Earth/Universe-system is young—with an age measured in thousands, not billions, of years. R.L. Wysong has commented:Both evolutionists and creationists believe evolution is an impossibility if the universe is only a few thousand years old. There probably is no statement that could be made on the topic of origins which would meet with so much agreement from both sides. Setting aside the question of whether vast time is competent to propel evolution, we must query if vast time is indeed available (1976, p. 144).It is interesting to observe how something on which both sides agree has caused so much disagreement.

Aside from the basic issue of whether creation or evolution is correct, the most serious area of conflict between the biblical and the evolutionary scenarios is the chronological framework of history—in other words, the age of the Earth. This matter is of importance not only to evolutionists, but to theistic evolutionists, creationists, and other “old-Earth creationists.” While a young Earth presents no problem whatsoever for a creationist, it is the death knell to each and every variety of the evolutionary scenario. A simple, straightforward reading of the biblical record indicates that the Cosmos was created in six days only a few thousand years ago. Opposed to that view is the idea of evolutionists that the Universe is 15-20 billion years old, and that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old. Further complicating matters is the fact that the biblical record indicates living things were placed on the newly created Earth even before the end of the six-day creative process (e.g., came on day three). The evolutionary scenario, however, postulates that primitive life evolved from nonliving chemicals roughly 3.5-4.0 billion years ago, and that all other life forms developed during the so-called geologic ages, with man arriving on the scene in one form or another 1-2 million years ago.

Even to a casual observer, it is apparent that this is no small problem. Much of the controversy today centers on the age of the Earth. The magnitude of the controversy is multiplied by two factors. First, theistic evolution and progressive creation are impossible if the Earth is young. Thus, if the proponents of these views wish to retain their belief systems, it is imperative that they find a way to place the time for an ancient Earth in the biblical record. Second, there is no middle ground that will permit the old-Earth/young-Earth scenarios to coexist; the gulf separating the biblical and evolutionary views on the topic of the age of the Earth is just too large. As Henry Morris has observed:Thus the Biblical chronology is about a million times shorter than the evolutionary chronology. A million-fold mistake is no small matter, and Biblical scholars surely need to give primary attention to resolving this tremendous discrepancy right at the very foundation of our entire Biblical cosmology. This is not a peripheral issue that can be dismissed with some exegetical twist, but is central to the very integrity of scriptural theology (1984, p. 115).

If the Earth is ancient, where in the Bible can the time be inserted to ensure that antiquity? The time needed to guarantee an old Earth might be placed: (a) before the creation week; (b) during the creation week; or (c) after the creation week. The attempt to insert geological time into the biblical text during the creation week is known as the Day-Age Theory—a concept that has fallen on hard times in recent years because it is completely without lexical or exegetical support from the biblical record (see Thompson, 1982, 1994). As a result, it has been rejected by numerous old-Earth creationists, theistic evolutionists, and progressive creationists. Rarely do those desiring to insert geologic time into the biblical record attempt to place the time after the creation week, for two reasons. First, placing time after the creation has occurred does not help the case of the theistic evolutionist or progressive creationist. Time “after the fact” is a moot issue. Second, the biblical genealogies (e.g., Genesis 5, Genesis 11, Luke 3, etc.) have the text so well protected that it is manifestly impossible to insert the billions of years of time needed to allow for an ancient Earth (see Thompson, 1989).

Thus, the Bible believer intent on accommodating his theology to the uniformitarian dogma of an ancient Earth must find another way to force vast time spans into Genesis 1. The only option remaining is to insert the time before the creation week—a concept known as the Gap Theory. THE GAP THEORYPopularity of the Gap Theory (also referred to by such synonyms as the Ruin-and-Reconstruction Theory, the Pre-Adamic Cataclysm Theory, and the Restitution Theory) is generally attributed to the writings of Thomas Chalmers, a nineteenth century Scottish theologian. In recent years, the Gap Theory has undergone an “evolution” of its own, and for that reason is not easily defined. There are several variations, and its defenders do not agree among themselves on strict interpretations. However, a brief summation of its main tenets might be as follows. The widely held view among gap theorists today is that the original creation of the world by God, as recorded in Genesis 1:1, took place billions of years ago. The creation was despoiled because of Satan’s rebellion against God, resulting in his being cast from heaven with his followers.

A cataclysm occurred at the time of Satan’s overthrow, and is said to have left the Earth in darkness (the “waste and void” of Genesis 1:2).[NOTE: It is alleged by some Gap theorists that the cataclysm occurring at Satan’s overthrow terminated the geologic ages, after which God “re-created.” It is alleged by others that the cataclysm occurred first, and then was followed by the geologic ages, after which God “re-created.”] The world as God had created it, with all its inhabitants, was destroyed, which, it is claimed, accounts for the myriad fossils present in the Earth. Many holding to this theory place the fossils of dinosaurs, so-called “ape-men,” and other extinct forms of life in this gap. Then, God “re-created” the Earth in six literal days. By way of summary, then, the “gap” between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 contains the story of an original creation, a judgment, and ruination, while the verses in Genesis 1:3 through the remainder of the chapter record the story of the Earth’s re-creation. Is the Gap Theory Popular? The Gap Theory has had, and continues to have, numerous supporters.

George H. Pember, in Earth’s Earliest Ages (1876), advocated the Gap Theory. Harry Rimmer, in Modern Science and the Genesis Record (1937), helped popularize the theory. The renowned Canadian anthropologist, Arthur C. Custance, produced Without Form and Void (1970), which many consider the ablest defense of the Gap Theory ever put into print. George DeHoff advocated the theory in Why We Believe the Bible (1944). J.D. Thomas, former chairman of the Bible Department at Abilene Christian University, has stated that “no man can prove that it is not true, at least in part” (1961, p. 54). The popular Scofield Reference Bible was first published in 1909; by 1917, it contained a reference to the Gap Theory in the footnotes accompanying Genesis 1. In more recent editions, references to the theory may be found as a footnote to Isaiah 45. John Clayton has accepted major portions of the Gap Theory, but has added to and deleted from the theory to produce what has come to be known as the Modified Gap Theory (see Clayton, 1976, pp. 147-148; Thompson, 1977, pp. 192-194; McIver, 1988, 8[3]:1-23; Jackson and Thompson, 1992, pp. 114-130).

Arguments Presented in Support of the Gap Theory Advocates of the Gap Theory base their beliefs on several arguments, a summary of which is given here; comments and refutation follow:1. Gap theorists suggest that the word bara (used in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27) must mean “to create” (i.e.: ex nihilo creation), while the word asah cannot mean “to create,” but rather means “to make.” Therefore, the original creation was “created”; the creation of the six days was “made” (i.e., “made over”) .2. Gap theorists suggest that the Hebrew verb hayetha (translated “was” in Genesis 1:2) should be rendered “became” or “had become”—a translation required in order to suggest a change of state from the original perfect creation to the chaotic conditions implied in verse 2. 3. Gap theorists believe that the “without form and void” of Genesis 1:2 (tohu wabohu) can refer only to something once in a state of repair, but now ruined. Pember accepted these words as expressing “an outpouring of the wrath of God.” 4. Gap theorists believe that the cataclysm that occurred was on the Earth, and was the direct result of Satan’s rebellion against God.

The cataclysm, of course, is absolutely essential to the Gap Theory. Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:11-17 are used as proof-texts to bolster the theory. 5. Gap theorists believe that Isaiah 45:18 (“God created the earth not in vain”—tohu; same word translated “without form” in Genesis 1:2) indicates that the Earth was not tohu at the initial creation. Therefore, they suggest, Genesis 1:2 can refer only to a judgment brought upon the Earth by God. 6. Gap theorists generally believe that there was a pre-Adamic creation of both non-human and human forms—a position adopted to account for the fossils present in the geologic strata.

By: Bert Thompson, Ph.D

Source: Address changed and unknown.


Quasar92