I desperately need valid proof of creationism.

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I had a friend and mentor, now passed away. He was very sin conscious when he was first saved. He confessed his sins often, including those he'd already confessed. He had a vision one morning. God showed him the book of the record of his life. As God turned the pages, there were many blank areas. When my friend asked what it meant, God told him that his sins had been erased. I would not be too sure that there are no books in heaven.
Heaven is not a physical place. God is Spirit. So Heaven is a spiritual place.
We are Spirits - in a material world
...are Spirits, in a material world
...are Spirits, in a material world
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,285
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,630.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Heaven is not a physical place. God is Spirit. So Heaven is a spiritual place.
We are Spirits - in a material world
...are Spirits, in a material world
...are Spirits, in a material world
I agree, but we will have bodies. Lord Jesus was not just a spirit when He rose from the dead. We will look much the same as we do now, but without any blemishes and likely how we were at the prime of our lives. No one has seen God, He is Spirit. We will see Jesus - and when we see Him, we will be like Him. God will also create a new heavens and a new earth. I have no idea what that will be like, but it will for sure be better than we have now.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Very simply. A word that describes some being made instantly would be a far different word from something being refashioned. Yet you insist that the word for cutting down trees could be the same word as Ex Nihilo. The two ideas are light years apart. Therefore Ex Nihilo creation does not exist.

Here is more data to research:
What are the 4 types of miracles Jesus performed?
  • healing miracles. Jesus healed people who were sick or disabled.
  • exorcism. the act of freeing someone of demons.
  • Restoration of Life. there are three occasion in the gospel eyes Jesus raises people from the dead.
  • nature miracles. A miracle in which Jesus shows his power over nature.
The miracles of Jesus - complete list!
The six days are literal. There is no reason to believe that they are not. Creating the entire universe in six literal days is perfectly within the capabilities of God.. Add that to the fact that He told us that He did it in six days.

So, unless you believe that the six literal days were beyond God's capabilities, OR that God lied to us.... Then I will accept that they were six literal days.

People accept the miracles of Christ due to the simple fact that their eternal lives depend on it.
If Christ said "Believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the six literal days of creation... and you shall be saved"... Every Christian would believe.

But, He didn't. So, they cling to the words of the created over the words of the creator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lismore
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Long before I read any academic literature on Genesis, I noticed in reading it that the first eleven chapters were written in a distinctly different genre of literature than the rest of Genesis. I then became curious and wondered who else had noticed that very important fact. Jump forward more than two decades, and I now have in my personal library 19 commentaries on Genesis, including the very best scholarly Jewish commentary, the three very best critical commentaries, and the two very best academic but non-critical commentaries.

Note: A critical commentary is a commentary that:
· Is based on the Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic text.
· Was (preferably) published in the last 40 years or so.
· Has a large bibliography and footnotes.
· Often has a translation of the original text.
· Focuses on narrower areas of the text (such as a book or a few books that can be grouped together, such as the Johannine Epistles).
· Tends to have a significant portion of their text devoted to behind-the-text issues such as the composition of the book, history of interpretation, text-critical issues, etc. These issues can have their own chapter.
https://helpdesk.asburyseminary.edu/portal/en/kb/articles/critical-commentary-definition

The authors of all of these commentaries are very much aware of the change in genre and its significance for interpreting the first eleven chapters of Genesis. Indeed, Claus Westermann wrote a 636 page critical commentary on Genesis 1-11. But—in what genre of literature were these eleven chapters written? They were written in the same genre of literature as epic tales, sagas, myths, and legends, and they need to be interpreted taking this fact into careful and prayerful consideration.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing more important to me than the truth—and I am not too proud to sit at the feet of scholars whom God has blessed with a wealth of wisdom and knowledge to learn more accurately the truth.



Carefully and prayerfully studying the Bible in the languages in which God, in His infinite wisdom, chose to give it to us and humbly learning from others whom God has blessed with a wealth of wisdom and knowledge is NOT being “caught up in the "wisdom of man"—and it is not being caught up in shameful ignorance.
I understand your stance on this. Doubt we will change each others view here.

God bless.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
A story doesn't have to be a specific literal event.
It can be a generalized true event.
Like if we say a person is saved, we don't link that to our vision of
Jesus erasing our name in one book and writing it in another physical book.
Actually, it is quite true in one respect.

Every human has their name written in the Lambs book of life. At the great white throne judgement, if you had not accepted Christ as for who He was.. your name will be stricken from the list and you will not have eternal life.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I think there is huge difference between NT which was written by witnesses of Jesus and OT stories where we don't know that much about the authors and how the books came to be. God used people with flaws to write the Bible, to get His message to us. Did Moses have the same knowledge of God and revelation as Paul and Peter? I doubt that.

It would be sad if the OP loses his faith over such a question as the validity of evolution, when he doesn't have to.
Many believe that God quoted the Torah to Moses. The fact that Moses spent enough time with God to have his face physically glowing... is enough to accept what he wrote to be as truthful as the NT.

One more thing that people don't realize. The fact that people lived as long as they did made it a fact that Methuselah was alive when Adam was. Shem knew Methuselah and lived long enough to know Abraham and probably Issac.

This means that Adam probably told Methuselah the history, which he knew first hand.
Methuselah would have told Shem who knew Issac.

This makes it pretty solid that what Issac knew was only third hand. Far from the "generations of story telling" that some believe.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Not sure of your point.
Yet, they will deny the fact that this same Jesus spoke the universe into existence in six days.

This is not a miracle attributed to Jesus. So it's easy to deny it as a fact.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The six days are literal. There is no reason to believe that they are not.

Very good reason. A literal "day" is the rotation of the earth in reference to the sun.

The sun was created on the 4th day.

So the days were not literal days.

And "Day" refers to just one point on the globe.

None of creation is referenced from one place on the globe. Now if it was "Day One in the Garden" then that would be a literal point of reference.
 
Upvote 0

PrincetonGuy

Veteran
Feb 19, 2005
4,888
2,274
U.S.A.
✟108,818.00
Faith
Baptist
I understand your stance on this. Doubt we will change each others view here.

God bless.

If God wanted us to believe that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are an accurate account of historic events, why did He give them to us in the same genre of literature as epic tales, sagas, myths, and legends rather than in the historical narrative genre that the rest of Genesis (and the rest of the Hextateuch) are written in?

If God wanted us to know that the earth is spherical rather than flat, why did He use language that fits a flat earth rather than a spherical earth? (Domes are not used to cover spheres, they are used to cover flat items like a cake plate). Moreover, He used the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ. In the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, we find an excellent article (Vol. III, pp. 568-569 [two lengthy columns of fine print per page] on the word רָקִיעַ. Of special importance is the following from the article,

The verb רָקַע, raká, means to expand by beating, whether by the hand, the foot, or any instrument. It is especially used, however, of beating out metals into thin plates (Exod. xxxix, 3, Numb. xvi, 39), and hence the substantive רַקֻּעַים “broad plates” of metal (Numb. 16:38). (The italics are theirs).​

Furthermore, the Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Brown, Driver, and Briggs published by Oxford University gives us the following meaning of word רָקִיעַ in Gen. 1:7, “the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above it.” (p. 956). Moreover, John Skinner, the late Principal and Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature at Westminster College, Cambridge, in his commentary on the Hebrew text of Genesis, writes,

6-8 Second Work: The Firmament.—The second fiat calls into existence a firmament, whose function is to divide the primeval waters into an upper and lower ocean, leaving a space between as the theater of further creative developments. The “firmament” is the dome of heaven, which to the ancients was no optical illusion, but a material structure, sometimes compared to an “upper chamber” (Ps. 104:12, Am 9:6) supported by “pillars” (Jb 26:11), and resembling in its surface a “molten mirror” (Jb 37:18). Above this are the heavenly waters, from which the rain descends through “windows” or “doors” (Gn 7:11, 8:2, 2 Ki 7:2, 19) opened and shut by God at His pleasure (Ps 78:23).​

For further and much more extensive proof that this word רָקִיעַ is correctly translated as “dome,” please see the following link:

The Firmament and the Water Above: Seely

This reference is especially important because the article was originally published in 1991 in The Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991) 227-40, a journal that was “founded upon the conviction that the Holy Scriptures are the word of God and the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” Moreover, The Westminster Theological Journal is published by Westminster Theological Seminary, one of the most theologically conservative seminaries anywhere in the world!
 
  • Informative
Reactions: zoidar
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FutureAndAHope

Just me
Site Supporter
Aug 30, 2008
6,362
2,912
Australia
Visit site
✟735,352.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hello everyone,

I'm assuming that this is the correct subforum in which to post this topic, but if not, forgive me. Basically, I've grown up in a home that believes in 100% biblical inerrancy and that's what I've believed, but recently I've been having a lot of doubts about creationism in particular. There are a few articles and websites that I have read that seem to completely and almost convincingly refute the idea of creationism. I'll link them below.

Ken Ham's 10 facts that prove creationism - Debunked

Evidence against a recent creation - RationalWiki

An Index to Creationist Claims

Falsifiability of creationism - RationalWiki

How am I, as a Christian, supposed to keep my belief in biblical inerrancy when there are all of these rebuttals that seemingly debunk creationism? Why can't creationists come up with good rebuttals to evolutionists' claims and rebuttals? If the creation story and the fall of man aren't true then is there no original sin by Adam? If there wasn't then why did God even have to send Christ to die for us, or did He? Was there even divine intervention in the universe's creation or formation? Is my faith just weak? I don't mean to cause controversy, I just really need some answers. I'm so tired of doubting my whole life. If these can't be answered, I'm afraid I may start to slip away to agnosticism. So, if anyone has answers, please share them.

Thank you!

I would suggest that you visit creationist websites and look at the argument from both sides. There is plenty of evidence for recent creation if you look.

One of my pet favorite, creationist "proofs", is the lack of true transitional fossils in the fossil record. You would expect that if things evolve through random mutations that you would see some pretty random creatures out there. But all of the creatures in the fossil record are fully functional, self-contained units.
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,218
2,617
✟885,745.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Many believe that God quoted the Torah to Moses. The fact that Moses spent enough time with God to have his face physically glowing... is enough to accept what he wrote to be as truthful as the NT.

Just as truthful I agree with, but to what was meant to be written, not necessarily to every historical detail.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Yet, they will deny the fact that this same Jesus spoke the universe into existence in six days.

This is not a miracle attributed to Jesus. So it's easy to deny it as a fact.
Actually, if you read, you will see that all things ever created were created by Him.

Colossians 1:16-17

King James Version

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Very good reason. A literal "day" is the rotation of the earth in reference to the sun.

The sun was created on the 4th day.

So the days were not literal days.

And "Day" refers to just one point on the globe.

None of creation is referenced from one place on the globe. Now if it was "Day One in the Garden" then that would be a literal point of reference.
Before the sun and the moon, a day was a day. God created the lights in the firmament to measure and keep track of the time already set.
The length of the day, month and year did not change when He created the sun and moon. The sun and the moon are like the hands on a clock.... timed so we can keep track and measure an existing time span.


Genesis 1:14

King James Version

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:
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
If God wanted us to believe that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are an accurate account of historic events, why did He give them to us in the same genre of literature as epic tales, sagas, myths, and legends rather than in the historical narrative genre that the rest of Genesis (and the rest of the Hextateuch) are written in?

If God wanted us to know that the earth is spherical rather than flat, why did He use language that fits a flat earth rather than a spherical earth? (Domes are not used to cover spheres, they are used to cover flat items like a cake plate). Moreover, He used the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ. In the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, we find an excellent article (Vol. III, pp. 568-569 [two lengthy columns of fine print per page] on the word רָקִיעַ. Of special importance is the following from the article,

The verb רָקַע, raká, means to expand by beating, whether by the hand, the foot, or any instrument. It is especially used, however, of beating out metals into thin plates (Exod. xxxix, 3, Numb. xvi, 39), and hence the substantive רַקֻּעַים “broad plates” of metal (Numb. 16:38). (The italics are theirs).​

Furthermore, the Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Brown, Driver, and Briggs published by Oxford University gives us the following meaning of word רָקִיעַ in Gen. 1:7, “the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above it.” (p. 956). Moreover, John Skinner, the late Principal and Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature at Westminster College, Cambridge, in his commentary on the Hebrew text of Genesis, writes,

6-8 Second Work: The Firmament.—The second fiat calls into existence a firmament, whose function is to divide the primeval waters into an upper and lower ocean, leaving a space between as the theater of further creative developments. The “firmament” is the dome of heaven, which to the ancients was no optical illusion, but a material structure, sometimes compared to an “upper chamber” (Ps. 104:12, Am 9:6) supported by “pillars” (Jb 26:11), and resembling in its surface a “molten mirror” (Jb 37:18). Above this are the heavenly waters, from which the rain descends through “windows” or “doors” (Gn 7:11, 8:2, 2 Ki 7:2, 19) opened and shut by God at His pleasure (Ps 78:23).​

For further and much more extensive proof that this word רָקִיעַ is correctly translated as “dome,” please see the following link:

The Firmament and the Water Above: Seely

This reference is especially important because the article was originally published in 1991 in The Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991) 227-40, a journal that was “founded upon the conviction that the Holy Scriptures are the word of God and the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” Moreover, The Westminster Theological Journal is published by Westminster Theological Seminary, one of the most theologically conservative seminaries anywhere in the world!
It matters not what "style" those "educated" in literature place these chapters and verses.
The bible was written to be easily understood and comprehended.
If God used evolution to create mankind He would have stated it as such. It's not a hard thing to describe, is it? It's not like its some complex theory that needs an in depth education to comprehend. Nope. Evolution would have been just as easy to write into Genesis.

It is written as six literal days. God even goes out of His way to say "there was evening and there was morning... the first day"..."the second day".... "the third day"...."the fourth day"... "the fifth day".... "the sixth day"...

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

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Just as truthful I agree with, but to what was meant to be written, not necessarily to every historical detail.
I believe that
Deuteronomy 9:10

Eludes to the fact that the Torah was written by God's own finger. Each and every historical fact is true and important. It was included due to the simple fact that God knew that many would not believe.
 
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,323
998
Houston, TX
✟163,485.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I believe that
Deuteronomy 9:10

Eludes to the fact that the Torah was written by God's own finger. Each and every historical fact is true and important. It was included due to the simple fact that God knew that many would not believe.
The verse quoted is talking about the 10 commandments, not about all the Torah.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,485
62
✟570,686.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The verse quoted is talking about the 10 commandments, not about all the Torah.
Actually, many believe that there was more than just the 10 commandments on those stones.

Sorry, I don't have more resources on that topic.
 
Upvote 0

PrincetonGuy

Veteran
Feb 19, 2005
4,888
2,274
U.S.A.
✟108,818.00
Faith
Baptist
It matters not what "style" those "educated" in literature place these chapters and verses.

Placing the word educated in quotation marks maliciously and dishonestly implies that those persons whom God has blessed with an excellent education were not blessed at all. Unfortunately, this malicious and dishonest tactic is routinely employed in discussions and debates by people who have, at best, an exceptionally poor education and an extreme disregard for those people who actually know something. Furthermore, the issue is not merely one of style, but of genre as in kind and form—a very important issue in the interpretation of literature.

The bible was written to be easily understood and comprehended.

I suppose that is the reason why we have over 340 denominations of Baptist along with hundreds of other denominations who all understand the Bible differently.

If God used evolution to create mankind He would have stated it as such. It's not a hard thing to describe, is it? It's not like its some complex theory that needs an in depth education to comprehend. Nope. Evolution would have been just as easy to write into Genesis.
The Bible is a religious text, and there is no place for science in religion.

It is written as six literal days. God even goes out of His way to say "there was evening and there was morning... the first day"..."the second day".... "the third day"...."the fourth day"... "the fifth day".... "the sixth day"...

Yes, the days in Genesis 1-2 are expressed as seven literal days, but literalness does not imply accuracy, and Genesis 1:6-8 is not an accurate account of creation. The Ante-Nicene Church Fathers believed that the earth was created in six literal days, and that on the second day “God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.”

The Post-Nicene Church Fathers also believed that the earth was created in six literal days, and that on the second day “God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.” And notice that the Bible uses the prepositions “under” and “above” rather than “within” and “beyond” beyond the dome.

But... believe as you want to believe.

I am not selfish enough to believe what I want to believe, but rather I believe the truth even though at times it is inconvenient to believe the truth. Moreover, I do not automatically dismiss what scholars have written just because they disagree with what I believe. Instead, I carefully and prayerfully read and consider what they have written—especially when they are men of profound faith in God and have invested their lives in the study of the word of God that they might help us to know God better and serve Him more effectively.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Before the sun and the moon, a day was a day. God created the lights in the firmament to measure and keep track of the time already set.
The length of the day, month and year did not change when He created the sun and moon. The sun and the moon are like the hands on a clock.... timed so we can keep track and measure an existing time span.


Genesis 1:14

King James Version

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:


Lights in the firmament would be universal and have no shadows. The world would have no shadows and no way to measure a day. A day being the light from one source causing a shadow as the world tuned.

And this only happens from the sun in the day and the moon at night...sometimes.
 
Upvote 0