Gap creationism v. progressive creationism..

[bcbsr]

I believe in gap creationism or the gap theory. The theory is based on Genesis 1:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

the gap is here: there was one creation of the world, the prehistoric world of ammonites, trilobites, etc. This gap is supported by the following:

Deuteronomy 32:4–32:4
4 The Rock, his work is perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God, without deceit, just and upright is he.

according to deut. there is no demiurge, but a creator without deceit, and the creation was perfect.

Isaiah 45:18–45:18
18 For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it - he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited! : I am the Lord, and there is no other.

Ezekiel 28:11-19 - the fall of Lucifer.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

'And the earth was without form', can also be rendered as 'became without form and void.

Psalm 104: 31-35
30 When you send forth your spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the ground.

The action of the Holy Spirit, upon the waters, is a renewal or re-creation, in six literal days.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

the dry land appears - it was already there, it was not made or created at this point.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

The earth brings forth - this is like a form-making potential of the earth itself.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

this light from the luminaries is different to the original light, in verse 3 - the luminaries are set in the firmament of the heaven - not outside it, as with outer-space vacuum. The waters have been divided, above and below - and presumably the waters are still above the firmament.

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

God made the sun and the moon, and the stars, on the fourth day. This means that there was light previously to day four, but no night - just evening and morning, so the cycle of 24 hours occurs with the making of the sun and moon on day four. This means that there is not a specific time duration for the previous days, and the vegetation, brought forth on the third day, might have lasted long enough for the trees to mature.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

v.25 says that God made the beast of the earth - this is a different Hebrew word to create. In my understanding, the earth and water has creative potential.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Man is created (see verse 27) in the image of God - not drawn from earth or water. Man does not have dominion over beast of the earth (it is missing in verse 26).

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

So, the cosmology of Genesis one is, in my understanding, like a flat disc, that appears out of water, above and below. The firmament is a space made between the waters. There is a barrier of some sort, separating the water above the firmament - so there is no vacuum of space above. When I studied this, years ago, sticking to a very literal reading of the text, I derived a flat disc surrounded by water. This went against my understanding of the globe-earth, so I couldn't deduce the truth from the text.
The bible makes it clear that the earth is fixed. Just one example -

Psalm 104:5
5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Atheist critics will say that the authors of the bible were just ignoramus' and believed that the earth was fixed. My research has led me to believe that the earth is fixed, and is not a globe. Space is fake and hoaxed. Genesis 1 was correct.
So what about Hugh Ross and 'reasons to believe? - old earth progressive creationism. I think there is value to the study that they have done on the hominids. However, in my opinion, they try to shoe-horn in the bible, to fit the science.
Genetic studies conclude that homo-sapiens originated 150,000 yrs in East Africa. There is evidence that homo-sapiens interbred with homo-neanderthal when they moved out of Africa into Europe. This lines up with Genesis one, but not with the rest of Genesis. So, do we need to drop the genealogies of Genesis? - arriving at 6000 years? I think so. I don't think you can try to work it, so that 6000 years becomes 50K yrs as Hugh Ross tries to do.

I personally think that the flood of Noah, is impossible. When you think about the birds and marsupials of Australia, and the bird distribution in the Americas - and the number of insect species - it seems impossible to me. There might have been a flood in southern Mesopotamia - which gave rise to the biblical flood story.

Wikipedia says that YEC science is pseudo-science. I think the YEC research is also useful, in revealing that geology is not according to Charles Lyell's uniformitarianism, but the layers were deposited by the great flood - only I believe that the great flood was within the gap of Genesis 1, and was not Noah's flood. And nothing survived it. There were no people on the earth. And the seas froze over and there was prolonged darkness:
Job 38:30
30 The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.

What is the age of mankind? Two species, created, some time after the gap in Genesis 1. Maybe three species, if we want to include denisovans. Evolutionists claim that homo-eretcus died out c. 1.8 myrs.
How long ago was the six days of creation? - I don't know, but I do know for certain that YEC is not true - as there is no radioactive carbon remaining in coal - and so the coal is older than 40K yrs.
Hugh Ross' team accept the standard cosmology - inc. the big bang - he has a PhD so he must be correct? I think not. Just because some of the bible is not true, doesn't mean that the foundation of Genesis 1 is not true.

Concerning the 7 days of creation, Genesis is also know as the first book of the law of Moses. So what if God gave Moses a vision of the creation for 7 days when he was on Mt Sinai? That is 7 days in the prophet's time frame - literal 24 hours days for Moses. And what if the point of the 7 days is simply to characterize God as creating each particular thing, as opposed to the popular religion at the time (polytheism) that had separate gods creating each thing? Read in that sense opens up a lot of possibilities in terms of how God did it and what historically happened, which would accommodate known scientific facts.

 

[mark kennedy]

Hugh Ross has a similarly convoluted gap theory, that just does not square with Scripture. This really isn't all that new, there was a theory in Darwin's day called catastrophism. They believe that the earth had seen creation before but was destroyed in some kind of cataclysm like the flood. I'm fine with a six day creation, except I think there might be a gap between verse 1 and 2. However the earth would have been devoid of life until six thousand years ago.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

Hugh Ross has a similarly convoluted gap theory, that just does not square with Scripture. This really isn't all that new, there was a theory in Darwin's day called catastrophism.

Hugh Ross believes in progressive creation - that the days in Genesis 1 are not days but ages. I suppose he thinks that creation happens every so often, millions of years, like with the standard evolution model, except without evolution - same uniformitarian idea.

 

[DamianWarS]

I believe in gap creationism or the gap theory. The theory is based on Genesis 1:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

the gap is here: there was one creation of the world, the prehistoric world of ammonites, trilobites, etc. This gap is supported by the following:

Deuteronomy 32:4–32:4
4 The Rock, his work is perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God, without deceit, just and upright is he.

according to deut. there is no demiurge, but a creator without deceit, and the creation was perfect.

Isaiah 45:18–45:18
18 For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it - he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited! : I am the Lord, and there is no other.

Ezekiel 28:11-19 - the fall of Lucifer.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

'And the earth was without form', can also be rendered as 'became without form and void.

Psalm 104: 31-35
30 When you send forth your spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the ground.

The action of the Holy Spirit, upon the waters, is a renewal or re-creation, in six literal days.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

the dry land appears - it was already there, it was not made or created at this point.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

The earth brings forth - this is like a form-making potential of the earth itself.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

this light from the luminaries is different to the original light, in verse 3 - the luminaries are set in the firmament of the heaven - not outside it, as with outer-space vacuum. The waters have been divided, above and below - and presumably the waters are still above the firmament.

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

God made the sun and the moon, and the stars, on the fourth day. This means that there was light previously to day four, but no night - just evening and morning, so the cycle of 24 hours occurs with the making of the sun and moon on day four. This means that there is not a specific time duration for the previous days, and the vegetation, brought forth on the third day, might have lasted long enough for the trees to mature.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

v.25 says that God made the beast of the earth - this is a different Hebrew word to create. In my understanding, the earth and water has creative potential.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Man is created (see verse 27) in the image of God - not drawn from earth or water. Man does not have dominion over beast of the earth (it is missing in verse 26).

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

So, the cosmology of Genesis one is, in my understanding, like a flat disc, that appears out of water, above and below. The firmament is a space made between the waters. There is a barrier of some sort, separating the water above the firmament - so there is no vacuum of space above. When I studied this, years ago, sticking to a very literal reading of the text, I derived a flat disc surrounded by water. This went against my understanding of the globe-earth, so I couldn't deduce the truth from the text.
The bible makes it clear that the earth is fixed. Just one example -

Psalm 104:5
5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Atheist critics will say that the authors of the bible were just ignoramus' and believed that the earth was fixed. My research has led me to believe that the earth is fixed, and is not a globe. Space is fake and hoaxed. Genesis 1 was correct.
So what about Hugh Ross and 'reasons to believe? - old earth progressive creationism. I think there is value to the study that they have done on the hominids. However, in my opinion, they try to shoe-horn in the bible, to fit the science.
Genetic studies conclude that homo-sapiens originated 150,000 yrs in East Africa. There is evidence that homo-sapiens interbred with homo-neanderthal when they moved out of Africa into Europe. This lines up with Genesis one, but not with the rest of Genesis. So, do we need to drop the genealogies of Genesis? - arriving at 6000 years? I think so. I don't think you can try to work it, so that 6000 years becomes 50K yrs as Hugh Ross tries to do.

I personally think that the flood of Noah, is impossible. When you think about the birds and marsupials of Australia, and the bird distribution in the Americas - and the number of insect species - it seems impossible to me. There might have been a flood in southern Mesopotamia - which gave rise to the biblical flood story.

Wikipedia says that YEC science is pseudo-science. I think the YEC research is also useful, in revealing that geology is not according to Charles Lyell's uniformitarianism, but the layers were deposited by the great flood - only I believe that the great flood was within the gap of Genesis 1, and was not Noah's flood. And nothing survived it. There were no people on the earth. And the seas froze over and there was prolonged darkness:
Job 38:30
30 The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.

What is the age of mankind? Two species, created, some time after the gap in Genesis 1. Maybe three species, if we want to include denisovans. Evolutionists claim that homo-eretcus died out c. 1.8 myrs.
How long ago was the six days of creation? - I don't know, but I do know for certain that YEC is not true - as there is no radioactive carbon remaining in coal - and so the coal is older than 40K yrs.
Hugh Ross' team accept the standard cosmology - inc. the big bang - he has a PhD so he must be correct? I think not. Just because some of the bible is not true, doesn't mean that the foundation of Genesis 1 is not true.

I think we go too far when we hyper analysis the creation account. the words and order have value and meaning but we miss the point when we try and reconcile it with modern science. I don't think it fits nor will it ever fit nor was it intended to fit. I'm not necessarily advocating evolution (I'll keep silent on that one) I'm just saying we are approaching it wrong as a literal account with or without gaps.

 

[mark kennedy]

Hugh Ross has a similarly convoluted gap theory, that just does not square with Scripture. This really isn't all that new, there was a theory in Darwin's day called catastrophism.

Hugh Ross believes in progressive creation - that the days in Genesis 1 are not days but ages. I suppose he thinks that creation happens every so often, millions of years, like with the standard evolution model, except without evolution - same uniformitarian idea.

His theory is actually quite elaborate and he is simply allegorizing the text of Scripture.theres no figurative language in Genesis and it's obviously presented as an historical narrative. Because of that the literal interpretation is always preferred. The vidios did a pretty nice job on analyzing the original, that alone made it worthwhile as an exposition.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

His theory is actually quite elaborate and he is simply allegorizing the text of Scripture.theres no figurative language in Genesis and it's obviously presented as an historical narrative. Because of that the literal interpretation is always preferred. The vidios did a pretty nice job on analyzing the original, that alone made it worthwhile as an exposition.

I think the second creation account (chapter 2) is allegorical, whereas the first account is literal. The compilers of the bible were wise enough to retain both accounts, despite them being contradictory - the second account is describing the fall of man, and the involvement of the serpent. Some would try to harmonize both accounts.

Others would say that we have to accept the second account of creation, but the first account is not specific about the creation of man - just that man was created - doesn't state that there was one woman or man, or how long ago - although I suspect there was one woman, and one serpent - probably in East Africa.
How would the various peoples end up all over the world, if we are going to accept the Ham, Shem and Japheth idea - I think it is more likely that homo-sapiens migrated out of Africa and started to hunt Neanderthals, (with guns) - and some intermixing.

 

[jsimms615]

I would like to call out that Adam and Eve, along with animals, were formed mature and commanded to multiply. Also, if God wants to flood the planet, He can. If He wants to put some animals on a boat, He can. In short, nothing is impossible for God. He's not bound by space, time or any natural construction, for they are all subject to the Creator. In other words, God is not bound by His own creation - on the contrary - He often works against nature (as we know it) by miracles, such as the greatest miracle of all: The death and resurrection of Christ for the forgiveness of sins.

Jesus re-affirms Genesis' creation account in Matthew 19:4-5 and the deluge in Matthew 24:37-39
We know this to be true, for all things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

As a side note, the flooding of the world is important to understand God's goodness and righteousness, for it illustrates God's faithfulness, His unchanging nature, that He punishes sin and that He has mercy and power to create all things new, as He will at the coming of Christ.

I believe what you are referring to is called the Old Earth theory meaning that God created the earth and it looked much older than it was on the first day of its existence.
Your right that nothing is impossible with God.

 

[dqhall]

I think we go too far when we hyper analysis the creation account. the words and order have value and meaning but we miss the point when we try and reconcile it with modern science. I don't think it fits nor will it ever fit nor was it intended to fit. I'm not necessarily advocating evolution (I'll keep silent on that one) I'm just saying we are approaching it wrong as a literal account with or without gaps.

Some people looked at paleontology, old earth theory, and also searched the texts of the Bible. They decided the earth is indeed very old. God is likewise very old and wise. The earth was not built in a day. God guided the advancement of species and some called it "intelligent design." People may procreate, but that life is limited to less than 123 years modern times. Many died before they were 80. It is the Holy Spirit who can give life and the Holy Spirit can take away life.

 

[mark kennedy]

I think the second creation account (chapter 2) is allegorical, whereas the first account is literal. The compilers of the bible were wise enough to retain both accounts, despite them being contradictory - the second account is describing the fall of man, and the involvement of the serpent. Some would try to harmonize both accounts.

Others would say that we have to accept the second account of creation, but the first account is not specific about the creation of man - just that man was created - doesn't state that there was one woman or man, or how long ago - although I suspect there was one woman, and one serpent - probably in East Africa.
How would the various peoples end up all over the world, if we are going to accept the Ham, Shem and Japheth idea - I think it is more likely that homo-sapiens migrated out of Africa and started to hunt Neanderthals, (with guns) - and some intermixing.

Really no reason the think the second chapter is figurative. Some of the naming conventions, 'Adam, Eve, and Serpent have figurative meanings buts the extent of it. It's popular with some evangelicals, is that there was a local flood and other communities that survived the flood. Neith a figurative interpretive or a local flood can be reconciled with the clear meaning of the text. Neanderthals had a migration pattern fonsistant with Noah and his family emerging from the Ark in modern Turkey. Their remains are found from Iraq to Spain, very often in caves indicating a practice common to this day. The Neanderthal had a brain 20% greater then our own, religion, tools and weapons of various kinds. DNA comparisons indicated their genome would have been compatible with our own.

 

[DamianWarS]

Some people looked at paleontology, old earth theory, and also searched the texts of the Bible. They decided the earth is indeed very old. God is likewise very old and wise. The earth was not built in a day. God guided the advancement of species and some called it "intelligent design." People may procreate, but that life is limited to less than 123 years modern times. Many died before they were 80. It is the Holy Spirit who can give life and the Holy Spirit can take away life.

I'm not declaring the earth is old/young I'm just saying the creation account doesn't help us determine either one.

 

[wonderkins]

Chapter 2 is not allegorical. It just goes into more specific detail of the creation of man. You see this kind of writing in other areas of the Bible too.

Kind of like:

1. I went to the store today
2. Today when I went to the store, I got some milk, eggs, and a can of coffee.

Nothing allegorical. Just more detailed.

 

[Jamsie]

I would have little to do with any church that made the view of creation such a basic issue.
While it is important, and my comment shows the fundamental flaw in 'gap age theory'. It is not a salvation issue, just one of reason.

I agree, though it can be an interesting discussion. Here is a brief overview of another perspective/interpretation:

1. Each day of creation is begun not with God doing something but saying something ..."And God said". (The origin of everything by one cause...the Word of God.)

a. Genesis 1 has a consistent construction -Command - accomplishment/fulfillment - activity after fulfillment - designated day.

b. Clearly "And God said" is the sole and only operative agent, God's command was the source of creation.. (Gen. 1 - Psalm 33:6 - Heb 11:3 - 2 Peter 3:5)

c. If, as Genesis states, that "Let there be..."Let the land...""Let the waters..." is the lone and unique agent then statements following would by necessity be explanatory. (Otherwise one would need to show that God's Word/command was not the sufficient cause of creation)

d. "And God made..." statements are not the operative agent but an explanation of results.

e. God's commands do not necessitate complete fulfillment within each day.

1.As an example Genesis 1:6,9,11,20,24 depict processes.

2.Further example Gen. 1:24 avoids "And God said, Let there be living creatures." as do the other verses attached to days.

So in 6 days God commanded all of the "laws" for the incipient powers, elements, material, etc. as to the natural processes of phenomena to be produced, just as they are today. Upon each fiat or command nothing more remained to be done. The time frames whether as science avers or otherwise finds the Genesis passage silent.

 

[Anguspure]

I believe in gap creationism or the gap theory. The theory is based on Genesis 1:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

the gap is here: there was one creation of the world, the prehistoric world of ammonites, trilobites, etc. This gap is supported by the following:

Deuteronomy 32:4–32:4
4 The Rock, his work is perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God, without deceit, just and upright is he.

according to deut. there is no demiurge, but a creator without deceit, and the creation was perfect.

Isaiah 45:18–45:18
18 For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it - he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited! : I am the Lord, and there is no other.

Ezekiel 28:11-19 - the fall of Lucifer.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

'And the earth was without form', can also be rendered as 'became without form and void.

Psalm 104: 31-35
30 When you send forth your spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the ground.

The action of the Holy Spirit, upon the waters, is a renewal or re-creation, in six literal days.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

the dry land appears - it was already there, it was not made or created at this point.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

The earth brings forth - this is like a form-making potential of the earth itself.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

this light from the luminaries is different to the original light, in verse 3 - the luminaries are set in the firmament of the heaven - not outside it, as with outer-space vacuum. The waters have been divided, above and below - and presumably the waters are still above the firmament.

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

God made the sun and the moon, and the stars, on the fourth day. This means that there was light previously to day four, but no night - just evening and morning, so the cycle of 24 hours occurs with the making of the sun and moon on day four. This means that there is not a specific time duration for the previous days, and the vegetation, brought forth on the third day, might have lasted long enough for the trees to mature.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

v.25 says that God made the beast of the earth - this is a different Hebrew word to create. In my understanding, the earth and water has creative potential.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Man is created (see verse 27) in the image of God - not drawn from earth or water. Man does not have dominion over beast of the earth (it is missing in verse 26).

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

So, the cosmology of Genesis one is, in my understanding, like a flat disc, that appears out of water, above and below. The firmament is a space made between the waters. There is a barrier of some sort, separating the water above the firmament - so there is no vacuum of space above. When I studied this, years ago, sticking to a very literal reading of the text, I derived a flat disc surrounded by water. This went against my understanding of the globe-earth, so I couldn't deduce the truth from the text.
The bible makes it clear that the earth is fixed. Just one example -

Psalm 104:5
5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Atheist critics will say that the authors of the bible were just ignoramus' and believed that the earth was fixed. My research has led me to believe that the earth is fixed, and is not a globe. Space is fake and hoaxed. Genesis 1 was correct.
So what about Hugh Ross and 'reasons to believe? - old earth progressive creationism. I think there is value to the study that they have done on the hominids. However, in my opinion, they try to shoe-horn in the bible, to fit the science.
Genetic studies conclude that homo-sapiens originated 150,000 yrs in East Africa. There is evidence that homo-sapiens interbred with homo-neanderthal when they moved out of Africa into Europe. This lines up with Genesis one, but not with the rest of Genesis. So, do we need to drop the genealogies of Genesis? - arriving at 6000 years? I think so. I don't think you can try to work it, so that 6000 years becomes 50K yrs as Hugh Ross tries to do.

I personally think that the flood of Noah, is impossible. When you think about the birds and marsupials of Australia, and the bird distribution in the Americas - and the number of insect species - it seems impossible to me. There might have been a flood in southern Mesopotamia - which gave rise to the biblical flood story.

Wikipedia says that YEC science is pseudo-science. I think the YEC research is also useful, in revealing that geology is not according to Charles Lyell's uniformitarianism, but the layers were deposited by the great flood - only I believe that the great flood was within the gap of Genesis 1, and was not Noah's flood. And nothing survived it. There were no people on the earth. And the seas froze over and there was prolonged darkness:
Job 38:30
30 The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.

What is the age of mankind? Two species, created, some time after the gap in Genesis 1. Maybe three species, if we want to include denisovans. Evolutionists claim that homo-eretcus died out c. 1.8 myrs.
How long ago was the six days of creation? - I don't know, but I do know for certain that YEC is not true - as there is no radioactive carbon remaining in coal - and so the coal is older than 40K yrs.
Hugh Ross' team accept the standard cosmology - inc. the big bang - he has a PhD so he must be correct? I think not. Just because some of the bible is not true, doesn't mean that the foundation of Genesis 1 is not true.

The really neat thing about the way God has created things to be is that both long age and short age creation can be true:
Gerald Schroeder - Articles - Age of the Universe

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

The really neat thing about the way God has created things to be is that both long age and short age creation can be true:
Gerald Schroeder - Articles - Age of the Universe

The YECs say that the population of humans, being such a successful species, would not equate with 150,000 years - so they predict population figures, working out at 6000 years. I think there is some merit to those ideas - I don't know really, the age of mankind. The YECs might be correct in their estimate of 10,000 years for mankind - the gap theory would allow for the age of coal being over 50,000 years - as that coal was formed by the great flood - before the gap, in my humble.
The gap theory would also allow for the evo's belief that homo-eretcus existed for 2 million years, and died out 1.8 million years ago.
I recently saw evidence, that hedgehogs and flamingos were found in the same fossil beds as dinosaurs - but the museums had not presented the evidence as it was contrary to their evo doctrine. The biblical kinds existed before the gap, and then after the gap - both mammals and dinos etc.

 

[DarkSoul999]

Not any more than He "erased tangible evidence" of the resurrection of Christ. Paul says: "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."

Real people witnessed Christ return from the grave.

The fantasy of a young flat Earth exists only in the minds of loopy modern Christians.

Genesis 1 was NEVER supposed to be a geology lesson. It was and is a highly abbreviated picture of the world meant to express God's role and power. A complete picture would fill a thousand books just like it does now!

 

[DarkSoul999]

The really neat thing about the way God has created things to be is that both long age and short age creation can be true:
Gerald Schroeder - Articles - Age of the Universe

I agree. If it was written to be highly specific like so many creation myths it would be totally dismissed by now.

The deliberate vagueness of Genesis caused Christians to invent early European science. Had it been a straight up creation myth about planet sized turtles we wouldn't even be typing on computers right now! xD

 

[DarkSoul999]

This Holy Bible, God's Inspired, Infallible and Inerrant Word, says NO! Who really gives a hoot about science or the like, they are ALWAYS WRONG!

You are typing on a computer built by scientists. You are typing over an internet built by scientists. You are using electricity discovered by scientists. Your continued existence probably involved medicine and food made by scientists. Was your comment meant as a joke? If not then I don't even want to know...unbelievable ingratitude and hypocrisy.

 

[DarkSoul999]

Yea I agree brother , God is not mere human and could create everything in 7 days but fundies want to lower him to thier understanding and force him to create everything over billions of years .

It works both ways as you can see . Opinion is an opinion .

Yep. It is not possible for any human, especially a below average human to comprehend infinite intelligence. God does not see ANY events in sequence. He already saw Christ on the cross when the early chapters of the Old Testament were still being written. Past, present, and future are totally interchangeable where he is sitting!

 

[DarkSoul999]

The sequence of the days is clear. Sadly, some want to obfuscate them and put others down.

Sequence means NOTHING to an infinite timeless being. Genesis could simply be a random selection of days and in random order and it would change absolutely nothing because the Bible makes it abundantly clear over and over again that God doesn't even notice a difference between past, present, and future tense. Only weakling mortals notice the movement of space and time.

"He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority." (Acts 1:7)

"And saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”"
(Mark 1:15)

"But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance."
(2 Peter 3:8-9)

The celestial objects THEMSELVES generate our human perception of time:

"He made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting."
(Psalm 104:19)

Now this verse will confuse you to no end because it directly contradicts a linear interpretation of the Bible:

"Behold, I will make the shadow cast by the declining sun on the dial of Ahaz turn back ten steps.” So the sun turned back on the dial the ten steps by which it had declined." (Isaiah 38:8)

God moves time backwards and forwards like it is nothing. Sequence means nothing. It only means something to weakling mortals.

 

[DarkSoul999]

Concerning the 7 days of creation, Genesis is also know as the first book of the law of Moses. So what if God gave Moses a vision of the creation for 7 days when he was on Mt Sinai? That is 7 days in the prophet's time frame - literal 24 hours days for Moses. And what if the point of the 7 days is simply to characterize God as creating each particular thing, as opposed to the popular religion at the time (polytheism) that had separate gods creating each thing? Read in that sense opens up a lot of possibilities in terms of how God did it and what historically happened, which would accommodate known scientific facts.

This is a brilliant comment! I didn't even consider that.