Genesis 6:1-4 and Jude 6&7 what do these passages mean? Why should we care?

[jhwatts]

Your profile says you are Baptist. Would that be Southern Baptist?

Yes.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

Yes.

I was Southern Baptist for some years. I never heard or read these things that you are saying from the Southern Baptist brothers.

 

[jhwatts]

I was Southern Baptist for some years. I never heard or read these things that you are saying from the Southern Baptist brothers.

Scofield Reference Bible, Dispensationalism, Ruin-restoration creationism, Gap creationism, Clarence Larkin, etc. These are all very Southern Baptist things.

 

[Riberra]

Ruin-restoration creationism, Gap creationism, Clarence Larkin, etc. These are all very Southern Baptist things.

Is it possible this come from Southern Baptist :
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible

What is presented talk about a Gap of billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 [using the original Hebrew text Genesis 1:2 The Earth Became a waste and a desolation tohu bohu ] ....That angels [not all] once inhabited the Earth in the First Earth Age ----You know these sons of God mentioned in Job who shouted for joy when God created the Earth ....That Satan rebellion against God came from that time in the first Earth age ...
Link:
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible

 

[Postvieww]

Interesting note: I ran across this video days ago before this discussion broke out on this thread. I placed it in my “come back to” file. I am neither endorsing nor condemning this at this time. I am looking further into it with an open mind. The video may shed some light on what this theory is all about and the thought process behind it.

 

[jhwatts]

Is it possible this come from Southern Baptist :
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible

What is presented talk about a Gap of billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 [using the original Hebrew text Genesis 1:2 The Earth Became a waste and a desolation tohu bohu ] ....That angels [not all] once inhabited the Earth in the First Earth Age ----You know these sons of God mentioned in Job who shouted for joy when God created the Earth ....That Satan rebellion against God came from that time in the first Earth age ...
Link:
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible

This idea was originally formulated by Thomas_Chalmers.

Yes. There are a lot things scattered in the Bible that describes what went on early in earths history. The idea of a gap in Genesis 1:1 through Genesis 1:2 now gives them a place.

 

[jhwatts]

More food for thought.

Lets look at the content of Genesis 11: (1-9). We see that it is describing the things that transpired in Genesis 10: (8-9). The author is doing the same thing early on in Genesis 1 and 2.

We are being told the location of the content of Genesis 2:3 through Genesis 4:26 and we see it belongs before Genesis 1:2. It is perfectly reasonable to move it there and it makes sense because it even tels us to.

Also notice in Genesis 10: (31-32) and 11:1. If you was not aware of the content in 11 is describing things that occurred earlier in 10 then the idea of all nations having one tongue adds much confusion.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

I have heard of this gap theory, and because of the Gen.1:2 reference to water being there, I have wondered about it. I will check our the links and video.

 

[jhwatts]

I have heard of this gap theory, and because of the Gen.1:2 reference to water being there, I have wondered about it. I will check our the links and video.

Once a person realizes that there is a gap and that Eden existed before Genesis 1:2. We can reconcile many things. The fall of the Assyrian Lucifer being one of them (Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 31, and Ezekiel 28) and the placement of the deep (Genesis 1:2). The things described in Jude 6&7 and what Genesis is talking about.

This is also why in some books of the Bible seem to be talking about different creations. For example, the creation events in Job are describing the creation of the world or this first creation. Creation content in Psalms also is describing the first creation. This is why they do not sound like they are describing what is perceived as the classic Genesis 1:2-Genesis 2:3 creation account.

It all makes much more sense when you look at this way.

 

[seventysevens]

Years ago I studied what is called the pre-adamic race - some beings that some say existed before Adam - some say they are angels and some say it was some other form that was neither angel nor man .
I followed various POV and teachings trying to get a provable and verifiable conclusion , and found none.

Consider that there have been 10's of thousands of archaeological digs through the course of history and none have come up with any evidence to validate any of these stories -they all will have their own explanations of various sorts but no real hard evidence.

One thing we do have that is proven is that when you have a group of people -say 30 people sitting in row of chairs and you say something to a person at one end of the row and tell them to pass it on to the next person and they to the next person and they to the next person and so on - by the time it reaches the end of the row it has been changed from what was originally said at the other end . It may change a little or it may change dramatically depending on the people in the row of chairs ,

We do know that the account of the story of creation told of in Genesis was not written down in the time period in which it occurred - rather it was a oral account that was passed on from generation to generation until the time of Moses that it finally got written down -

Consider how many generations of people passed down these oral accounts and the changes that would have occurred from passing it on from one person to the next over generations of time .
Now consider the various interpretations we have being taught today of what we do have written in Genesis and still we cannot prove it.

We accept that which was happening during the times of Moses but we do not know how many generations existed before Moses in provable manner as we only have what was said to have been in a record created during the time frame of Moses.

While we do have the story of creation - we don't have hard physical evidence to prove any interpretation since no one at that time considered there would be any need to preserve any artifacts ,

What we do have is the bible accounts that are considered
"God breathed" words that support the current most taught view of Adam being the first created human which opposes the teachings of a second creation of Adam.
We will not know if there was truly any other race of beings before Adam until Jesus returns to tell us about the whole details of the Creation of the world as told by He Jesus the Creator of the world

 

[jhwatts]

Consider that there have been 10's of thousands of archaeological digs through the course of history and none have come up with any evidence to validate any of these stories -they all will have their own explanations of various sorts but no real hard evidence.

There is a ton of archaeological evidence supporting many potential types of people over time and fits well within what I have presented. Also, geologically this makes much more sense. In addition, this meshes nicely with proposed geological time scales. Although my interest is in harmonizing scripture and not so much science, its seems nice not trying to fight science to support what I think and feel is right.

We will not know if there was truly any other race of beings before Adam until Jesus returns to tell us about the whole details of the Creation of the world as told by He Jesus the Creator of the world

Yes. I agree completely. This is why the truth about the creation man is beginning to surface.

One thing we do have that is proven is that when you have a group of people -say 30 people sitting in row of chairs and you say something to a person at one end of the row and tell them to pass it on to the next person and they to the next person and they to the next person and so on - by the time it reaches the end of the row it has been changed from what was originally said at the other end . It may change a little or it may change dramatically depending on the people in the row of chairs ,

We do know that the account of the story of creation told of in Genesis was not written down in the time period in which it occurred - rather it was a oral account that was passed on from generation to generation until the time of Moses that it finally got written down -

Consider how many generations of people passed down these oral accounts and the changes that would have occurred from passing it on from one person to the next over generations of time .
Now consider the various interpretations we have being taught today of what we do have written in Genesis and still we cannot prove it.

We accept that which was happening during the times of Moses but we do not know how many generations existed before Moses in provable manner as we only have what was said to have been in a record created during the time frame of Moses.

So should we scrap an idea that harmonizes many different things, all in the interest of tradition.


Read the verse below. Think about if man already existed and he was being re-made. If you think about it, it seems man was be remade in a different form or image.

Genesis 1:26

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.

 

[seventysevens]

There is a ton of archaeological evidence supporting many potential types of people over time and fits well within what I have presented. Also, geologically this makes much more sense. In addition, this meshes nicely with proposed geological time scales. Although my interest is in harmonizing scripture and not so much science, its seems nice not trying to fight science to support what I think and feel is right.

The thing is -it is not able to prove any new creation theory a reality ;if we could it would have been done - carbon radiometric dating is not a perfect science and has flaws which is why there are various time dating that are from different science agencies , one may say the earth is 50 million years old and another will say it is 200 million years old and another say it is 500,000 years old -
like the documentaries that support Darwinism and the time span it took for ape to transform into a human man or others that say the neanderthal took a certain amount of time to transform into a modern man .
Their dates are varied and many people are convinced that apes became man over time.
Due to the manner in which "scientists" have depicted this transformation - but yet they have no conclusive proof - so then they manufacture it and make a claim that they "found " the missing link - then it is proven to be a fraud
=================================================

==================================================

At this time it is a theory and it may prove to be true - and it may prove to be something else entirely . There has been human man fossils and dinosaur fossils found to be side by side within a few feet in the same strata of limestone and no way to know if it was before or during the time of Adam as the bible speaks of beasts(some translations use monsters) during the time of Adam . It is determined by the POV of the reader if they believe dinosaurs were the same time period- as we cannot prove either way, and cannot determine if the words "beasts of the earth" refer to buffalo or dinosaurs or both as we cannot pinpoint when dinos were created or when they were killed but we can say they would not have survived the flood - they can only suppose what they ate based upon what we know from this world - if they have teeth like a shark it is assumed they ate meat , teeth like human they were vegetarian - but human eat meat as well

So should we scrap an idea that harmonizes many different things, all in the interest of tradition.

No not at all - but to avoid any heretical problems in teaching it is best to continue to examine the archaeological digs to see if they find something that can prove one way or another .
I recall there was a huge debate over if there was a certain city and a certain king that ever existed as for up until the 20th century no evidence had been found to prove they existed - then they found thousands of bricks dating to that period with the kings name on it in the very location the city was said to exist - it is now accepted that it did exist and that king was a real man and a king

Read the verse below. Think about if man already existed and he was being re-made. If you think about it, it seems man was be remade in a different form or image.
Genesis 1:26

IMO it makes more sense to think that the "Let us make man in our image" - refers to the Father God , Holy Spirit and Jesus as mankind was created in their image and not the image of a human man reincarnated
I believe that the Creator of all things both earth - the heavenlies and all the universes - the very same person suffered on the cross for us to have eternal life would have provided a lot more info on that matter so there would be no doubt if He re-made Man-
He suffered the worse that any man has ever suffered -For us His beloved and IF he had re-made Man he would not keep it hidden from us and If He would speak of it in His word He would have done it a clearly stated manner so it would not cause anyone confusion over what He had done

 

[Riberra]

Once a person realizes that there is a gap and that Eden existed before Genesis 1:2. We can reconcile many things. The fall of the Assyrian Lucifer being one of them (Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 31, and Ezekiel 28) and the placement of the deep (Genesis 1:2). what Genesis is talking about.

This is also why in some books of the Bible seem to be talking about different creations. For example, the creation events in Job are describing the creation of the world or this first creation. Creation content in Psalms also is describing the first creation.

The First Earth Age ... well described in that page:
The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible

The message carried goes deeper ---->

Christians themselves would agree that our Father created us as spiritual beings. So why are we walking around in these corruptible flesh bodies when we have an incorruptible spiritual body that feels no pain and fails to see the effects of age (1 Corinthians 15:35-55)?

The answer to that question lies with us understanding there was an age before this one we presently live in. An age where man existed in spiritual bodies [The angels who chose to live on the Earth in the First Earth Age -----> The SONS of GOD SHOUTED OF JOY when God created the Earth We presently live in the second Heaven and earth age which we will call the flesh age. Same Heaven, same earth, just a different dispensation of time. With that having been said, let us now document these facts in God’s Word.

The World That Then Was, The First Earth Age | World Events and the Bible

This is why they do not sound like they are describing what is perceived as the classic Genesis 1:2-Genesis 2:3 creation account.
The things described in Jude 6&7 and what Genesis is talking about.
It all makes much more sense when you look at this way.

What is described after Genesis 1:2 concern our actual Earth Age ....
That video that Postview posted get it right .... Except the part about Genesis 6:1-4.

The Third Earth Age is described in Revelation 21 Revelation 22.

 

[DavidPT]

We will not know if there was truly any other race of beings before Adam until Jesus returns to tell us about the whole details of the Creation of the world as told by He Jesus the Creator of the world

Why would we need to wait until then, and why wouldn't we already truly know there was not a race of beings before Adam?

Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Obviously if there was a race of beings before Adam, this race would have also included women. Yet the text above indicates there was no such thing as women until God made one, and that Adam then said--- she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. The text doesn't say she shall be called woman because women already existed prior to the creation of man on the 6th day. It says she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of Man. How does it make sense that there may have been a race of beings before Adam, but that this race contained no women?


Adam tells us why she is called woman. How then could there have already been other women existing before one is made according to the text above?

Assuming a previous race of beings and that this included males and females, and that the males were men, what were the females then, if not women? But how could any of them be a woman if no such thing as a woman even existed until God made one according to Genesis 2? How can one be a female but not a woman? Clearly then, no race of beings existed before Adam. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Easily debunked.

 

[Riberra]

Why would we need to wait until then, and why wouldn't we already truly know there was not a race of beings before Adam?

Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Obviously if there was a race of beings before Adam, this race would have also included women. Yet the text above indicates there was no such thing as women until God made one, and that Adam then said--- she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. The text doesn't say she shall be called woman because women already existed prior to the creation of man on the 6th day. It says she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of Man. How does it make sense that there may have been a race of beings before Adam, but that this race contained no women?


Adam tells us why she is called woman. How then could there have already been other women existing before one is made according to the text above?

Assuming a previous race of beings and that this included males and females, and that the males were men, what were the females then, if not women? But how could any of them be a woman if no such thing as a woman even existed until God made one according to Genesis 2? How can one be a female but not a woman? Clearly then, no race of beings existed before Adam. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Easily debunked.

Listen and learn: [Good finding by Postview ]

 

[DavidPT]

Listen and learn: [Good finding by Postview]

That video is 40 minutes in length. Do you have a link to an article instead? My connection today is pretty laggy, so watching vids on YouTube is not practical for me. Especially lengthy vids.

 

[jhwatts]

Why would we need to wait until then, and why wouldn't we already truly know there was not a race of beings before Adam?

Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Obviously if there was a race of beings before Adam, this race would have also included women. Yet the text above indicates there was no such thing as women until God made one, and that Adam then said--- she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. The text doesn't say she shall be called woman because women already existed prior to the creation of man on the 6th day. It says she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of Man. How does it make sense that there may have been a race of beings before Adam, but that this race contained no women?


Adam tells us why she is called woman. How then could there have already been other women existing before one is made according to the text above?

Assuming a previous race of beings and that this included males and females, and that the males were men, what were the females then, if not women? But how could any of them be a woman if no such thing as a woman even existed until God made one according to Genesis 2? How can one be a female but not a woman? Clearly then, no race of beings existed before Adam. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Easily debunked.

The point to realize is the term Pre-Adamite is inaccurate. The ones in Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:26 are the ones people have termed as Pre-Adamite. As I stated earlier those described in Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:26 occurred before Genesis 1:2 and predate what most claim to the initial 7 day creation. This reinforces your point concerning the first women.

 

[Riberra]

That video is 40 minutes in length. Do you have a link to an article instead? My connection today is pretty laggy, so watching vids on YouTube is not practical for me. Especially lengthy vids.

There is no link to an article ...
Try this ----only put the Youtube link and download on your computer ....watch it with your favorite video reader.
Convert In MP4 - Download YouTube videos in MP4 format

 

[DavidPT]

Listen and learn: [Good finding by Postview ]

On YouTube I have an addon to download audio only, so I did. So I began skimming through this 40 minute video that I downloaded as audio, and already I have encountered a few problems with the thinking of the person in the video. One being that he apparently thinks Genesis 1 and 2 are not the same creation account. That,too, is easily debunked.

 

[Riberra]

On YouTube I have an addon to download audio only, so I did. So I began skimming through this 40 minute video that I downloaded as audio, and already I have encountered a few problems with the thinking of the person in the video. One being that he apparently thinks Genesis 1 and 2 are not the same creation account. That,too, is easily debunked.

If you just go skimming here and there you will miss the details.
All that is explained in details as the presentation goes on in the audio...