Is the creation debate over?

[jameslouise]

The stance among Gap Theorists is that the word create (bara) means a new thing from God. (I would expand this to a new design from God) and make (asah) meaning anything God works on he has made, so making 'create' a subset of 'made'

Genesis 1 uses the phrase 'it was so' 6 times and perhaps 7 with the modified 'it was so; to 'was' in Gen 1:3
I suggest the ‘it was so’ has a plain text and obvious meaning. I suggest it is a confirmation of Gap Theory as it is referring to life or the cosmos in the previous creation. ‘It used to be that way’ (in the first creation). Note the way ‘it was so’ is never used when the word created (‘bara’) is used. ‘Bara’ is used for man and whales and birds, all of which are not in the original creation in Gap Theory as I present it-more later. They cannot be subject to ‘it was so’ as they were not there.
This is consistent with ‘bara’ meaning a new creation from God. And explains the omission of ‘it was so ‘ from some days or from some day 6 statements. (Gen 1:20-23) (Gen 1:26-27) (Gen 1:28).
Genesi 1:29-30 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so
Note how animals are vegetarians and have an added ’it was so’ whereas. man also is described as a vegetarian but he does not get the ‘it was so’ added. Why?
In effect any reference to man or a new creation (bara) bars the use of 'it was so' as they are not in the original creation.

'It was so what' you say? Well, there is a double narrative running right through Genesis 1 and 2 that, IMO, confirms Gap Theory beyond any doubt, every word in every verse, The double narrative first identified by Paul the Apostle in 2 Cor 4;6 but being extendable to both chapters and the whole only works with Gap theory and I believe with all my heart I can prove it.

Genesis Similitudes

 

[BobRyan]

you may want to delete either this thread --

or this one -- #2

 

[jameslouise]

you may want to delete either this thread --

or this one -- #2

cant work out how to do it?

 

[BobRyan]

cant work out how to do it?

you can click on the "report" button for the thread you want to delete -- then in the comment that it allows you to send along to the admin - just request that the thread be deleted because it is an accidental duplicate.

 

[jameslouise]

you can click on the "report" button for the thread you want to delete -- then in the comment that it allows you to send along to the admin - just request that the thread be deleted because it is an accidental duplicate.

thanks

 

[jameslouise]

Yet in Creation, in History, in God's Word,
there is nothing, not even a hint at all, nothing that confirms anything false. ---- except of course the frequent confirming in God's Word and throughout History of mankind of man being false and devising many schemes.

Hi aaron thanks for the comment but there was a previous creation the bible tells me so

 

[coffee4u]

The stance among Gap Theorists is that the word create (bara) means a new thing from God. (I would expand this to a new design from God) and make (asah) meaning anything God works on he has made, so making 'create' a subset of 'made'

Genesis 1 uses the phrase 'it was so' 6 times and perhaps 7 with the modified 'it was so; to 'was' in Gen 1:3
I suggest the ‘it was so’ has a plain text and obvious meaning. I suggest it is a confirmation of Gap Theory as it is referring to life or the cosmos in the previous creation. ‘It used to be that way’ (in the first creation). Note the way ‘it was so’ is never used when the word created (‘bara’) is used. ‘Bara’ is used for man and whales and birds, all of which are not in the original creation in Gap Theory as I present it-more later. They cannot be subject to ‘it was so’ as they were not there.
This is consistent with ‘bara’ meaning a new creation from God. And explains the omission of ‘it was so ‘ from some days or from some day 6 statements. (Gen 1:20-23) (Gen 1:26-27) (Gen 1:28).
Genesi 1:29-30 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so
Note how animals are vegetarians and have an added ’it was so’ whereas. man also is described as a vegetarian but he does not get the ‘it was so’ added. Why?
In effect any reference to man or a new creation (bara) bars the use of 'it was so' as they are not in the original creation.

'It was so what' you say? Well, there is a double narrative running right through Genesis 1 and 2 that, IMO, confirms Gap Theory beyond any doubt, every word in every verse, The double narrative first identified by Paul the Apostle in 2 Cor 4;6 but being extendable to both chapters and the whole only works with Gap theory and I believe with all my heart I can prove it.

Genesis Similitudes

It will never be over as heretical teachings will continue to influence people away from the pure Word of God.

There is no 'double narrative'

God created the world in 6 days.

There is no 'confirmation' of the gap theory except what people wish to see. You wish it to be true for reasons I can only assume is to try and appeal to evolutionists.

As for Bara (create) and asah (make) these words do not appear as gap theorists claim they do. They are used interchangeably in the Bible and In several verses they are even used together to describe the same event.

So no I will continue to stand for Gods word as written.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.

 

[jameslouise]

The devil lies. Oh, wait, maybe you have a different bible, not the Gospel..... oh well, it does not help anyone.

Hi Aaron ,I think Jesus Himself confirms Gap theory in the Gospel too, Wanna see how?
Joh 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water
Which scripture is Jesus referring to and I think I know and it also confirms Gap Theory?

 

[jameslouise]

It will never be over as heretical teachings will continue to influence people away from the pure Word of God.

There is no 'double narrative'

God created the world in 6 days.

There is no 'confirmation' of the gap theory except what people wish to see. You wish it to be true for reasons I can only assume is to try and appeal to evolutionists.

As for Bara (create) and asah (make) these words do not appear as gap theorists claim they do. They are used interchangeably in the Bible and In several verses they are even used together to describe the same event.

So no I will continue to stand for Gods word as written.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.

Hi coffee for you thanks for the reply, You make several points?

Coffee4u says There is no 'double narrative'

From Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12 and nothing else and not using New Testament scripture I can say:
Before salvation-God will send forth every man’s spirit, Jesus Christ as a man and The Holy Spirit. Man will not recognise Jesus as God until saved. Man will hear The Holy Spirits ‘voice’ in our spirit prior to salvation and The Holy Spirit will work upon our spirit. The Holy Spirit will come ‘loaded’ with the indwellings. The Holy Spirit will bear fruit. After salvation-Man will now recognise Jesus as a man and God after salvation. After Salvation the Holy Spirit will have given the ‘indwelling package’ to man. Man will be in the family of God. Some men will not be saved.
I can also say the first creation had grass, herbs and trees. All this from 2 amazingly designed bits of text. A coincidence??? NO a work of majestic beauty Yes

Coffee4u says-God created the world in 6 days.There is no 'confirmation' of the gap theory except what people wish to see. I am showing it you here. it is your choice if you read it or not Genesis Similitudes

coffee4u says-You wish it to be true for reasons I can only assume is to try and appeal to evolutionists.
I do not believe evolution at all so that does not apply to me at any rate though I do take your point and understand that is why some come to Gap Theory. I can describe a biblical answer for every fossil layer. Can you? Please start by explaining why there is no human fossils before the Cenozoic?

Coffee4u As for Bara (create) and asah (make) these words do not appear as gap theorists claim they do. They are used interchangeably in the Bible and In several verses they are even used together to describe the same event.
The God who wrote your DNA code also wrote the Bible and i do not believe there is redundant data in either.
If what you say is true the Gen 2:3 Then God 'created and created' or 'made and made' would be valid translations then?? Likewise for Isa 43:7 and Isa 45:18. When they appear together reveals much:
'Bara' a new thing (design) exclusively from God
And God said, Let us make man in our image....
So God created man in his own image....
So, in Heaven when God is to make man He uses 'make'(asah) because He is 'copying' the design there Body. spirit and soul to correspond to Jesus, God the father and The Holy Spirit This is not a new design from that perspective. Back on earth we are a new thing, a new design hence ' created' (bara)

Coffee4u says:Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.
Yeh absolutely agree no problem for me here. God worked on everything in the whole universe. If it said created I would not be Gap man. Anything God works on has made, created being a subset of made.

 

[coffee4u]

Hi coffee for you thanks for the reply, You make several points?

Coffee4u says There is no 'double narrative'

From Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12 and nothing else and not using New Testament scripture I can say:
Before salvation-God will send forth every man’s spirit, Jesus Christ as a man and The Holy Spirit. Man will not recognise Jesus as God until saved. Man will hear The Holy Spirits ‘voice’ in our spirit prior to salvation and The Holy Spirit will work upon our spirit. The Holy Spirit will come ‘loaded’ with the indwellings. The Holy Spirit will bear fruit. After salvation-Man will now recognise Jesus as a man and God after salvation. After Salvation the Holy Spirit will have given the ‘indwelling package’ to man. Man will be in the family of God. Some men will not be saved.
I can also say the first creation had grass, herbs and trees. All this from 2 amazingly designed bits of text. A coincidence??? NO a work of majestic beauty Yes

Coffee4u says-God created the world in 6 days.There is no 'confirmation' of the gap theory except what people wish to see. I am showing it you here. it is your choice if you read it or not Genesis Similitudes

coffee4u says-You wish it to be true for reasons I can only assume is to try and appeal to evolutionists.
I do not believe evolution at all so that does not apply to me at any rate though I do take your point and understand that is why some come to Gap Theory. I can describe a biblical answer for every fossil layer. Can you? Please start by explaining why there is no human fossils before the Cenozoic?

Coffee4u As for Bara (create) and asah (make) these words do not appear as gap theorists claim they do. They are used interchangeably in the Bible and In several verses they are even used together to describe the same event.
The God who wrote your DNA code also wrote the Bible and i do not believe there is redundant data in either.
If what you say is true the Gen 2:3 Then God 'created and created' or 'made and made' would be valid translations then?? Likewise for Isa 43:7 and Isa 45:18. When they appear together reveals much:
'Bara' a new thing (design) exclusively from God
And God said, Let us make man in our image....
So God created man in his own image....
So, in Heaven when God is to make man He uses 'make'(asah) because He is 'copying' the design there Body. spirit and soul to correspond to Jesus, God the father and The Holy Spirit This is not a new design from that perspective. Back on earth we are a new thing, a new design hence ' created' (bara)

Coffee4u says:Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.
Yeh absolutely agree no problem for me here. God worked on everything in the whole universe. If it said created I would not be Gap man. Anything God works on has made, created being a subset of made.

I can see you fully believe what you say but I also believe 100% that you are misguided. I am guessing at some point be it through a book, a web site or a speaker you were showed the gap theory and it made sense. Perhaps before this you believed in evolution? They can be very persuasive, but they are wrong.
Before I became a Christian I believed in evolution, just your average everyday evolutionist. I am not and never have been interested in the science of it all, nether am I now. I am a scriptural creationist. Meaning I believe what I believe from scripture alone. I don't need creation science to back me up, even though they make some helpful and interesting points. Nor am I scriptural creationist due to some book or speaker. Which is why I said pure scripture in my first post. Too many people are scripture plus; plus their traditions, plus what their church says, plus this book or this speaker.
As a new Christian struggling with evolution vs what the Bible was telling me I came across the gap theory, I looked into it seriously, I looked at the scriptures they provided. It did not support the idea the way they were claiming. I had no other option but to become a 6 day creationist (no gap) and this has not changed or wavered in the past 30 years. Nothing that I have ever been shown by a gap proponent, or any other creation model such as flat earth (and I looked seriously into the scriptures for that as well) holds up to what the scriptures say.

Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12
11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” 12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

The paragraph you wrote has no connection with the two verses you referred too, its why I put them here in full. If you prefer we can use the Old King James but I am not a stickler. Verses 11 and 12 are a very direct look into what God said to Adam and Eve in the garden. It gives the first example of the human sinful condition. That inner need people have to pass the blame so as to appear blameless before God. Not that they do but its a hiding mechanism. These two verses makes no mention of Christ, the Holy Spirit or anything else you were talking about.

You then jump and say "the first creation had grass, herbs and trees".
You didn't establish a first creation through scripture to be referencing back to it. Claiming it is not good enough, it has to be shown to be so in scripture.
God created grass, herbs and trees during the 6 days of creation.

You then jump again and say "A coincidence??? NO a work of majestic beauty"
What coincidence are you talking about?

I am not being facetious here I am generally perplexed by your train of thought.

"I am showing it you here. it is your choice if you read it or not Genesis Similitudes"
I don't want to see another mans writing on a web page, show me through scripture. What scripture convinced you of the gap theory? I can make another post back about the scriptures used on that page if you don't mind waiting. I think this is already long enough.


"I can describe a biblical answer for every fossil layer. Can you? Please start by explaining why there is no human fossils before the Cenozoic?"

No, nor do I want to. When I rejected evolution 30 years ago I rejected all of it.

Do you realize what you just did? You just appealed to the world to make a point about scripture.
Who came up with the term Cenozoic? Evolutionary geologists. But you said you don't believe in evolution, so why make the appeal towards it?
If you make evolution part of your reasoning then your belief has far more to do with evolution than you may care to realize. It then becomes not a doctrine based solidly on what scripture says but more about a scrambling solution due to the perceived threat or 'facts' of evolution. Things only need a solution when they are real. Evolution is not real, its a strong delusion sent to mankind who do not want to hear God's word.
2 Thessalonians 2
11: For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie
12: and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Fossils were sorted by the world wide flood.

I feel this is enough text in one post and I have no more time anyway. I did notice what else you wrote and will be back to answer.

 

[jameslouise]

I can see you fully believe what you say but I also believe 100% that you are misguided. I am guessing at some point be it through a book, a web site or a speaker you were showed the gap theory and it made sense. Perhaps before this you believed in evolution? They can be very persuasive, but they are wrong.
Before I became a Christian I believed in evolution, just your average everyday evolutionist. I am not and never have been interested in the science of it all, nether am I now. I am a scriptural creationist. Meaning I believe what I believe from scripture alone. I don't need creation science to back me up, even though they make some helpful and interesting points. Nor am I scriptural creationist due to some book or speaker. Which is why I said pure scripture in my first post. Too many people are scripture plus; plus their traditions, plus what their church says, plus this book or this speaker.
As a new Christian struggling with evolution vs what the Bible was telling me I came across the gap theory, I looked into it seriously, I looked at the scriptures they provided. It did not support the idea the way they were claiming. I had no other option but to become a 6 day creationist (no gap) and this has not changed or wavered in the past 30 years. Nothing that I have ever been shown by a gap proponent, or any other creation model such as flat earth (and I looked seriously into the scriptures for that as well) holds up to what the scriptures say.

Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12
11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” 12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

The paragraph you wrote has no connection with the two verses you referred too, its why I put them here in full. If you prefer we can use the Old King James but I am not a stickler. Verses 11 and 12 are a very direct look into what God said to Adam and Eve in the garden. It gives the first example of the human sinful condition. That inner need people have to pass the blame so as to appear blameless before God. Not that they do but its a hiding mechanism. These two verses makes no mention of Christ, the Holy Spirit or anything else you were talking about.

You then jump and say "the first creation had grass, herbs and trees".
You didn't establish a first creation through scripture to be referencing back to it. Claiming it is not good enough, it has to be shown to be so in scripture.
God created grass, herbs and trees during the 6 days of creation.

You then jump again and say "A coincidence??? NO a work of majestic beauty"
What coincidence are you talking about?

I am not being facetious here I am generally perplexed by your train of thought.

"I am showing it you here. it is your choice if you read it or not Genesis Similitudes"
I don't want to see another mans writing on a web page, show me through scripture. What scripture convinced you of the gap theory? I can make another post back about the scriptures used on that page if you don't mind waiting. I think this is already long enough.


"I can describe a biblical answer for every fossil layer. Can you? Please start by explaining why there is no human fossils before the Cenozoic?"

No, nor do I want to. When I rejected evolution 30 years ago I rejected all of it.

Do you realize what you just did? You just appealed to the world to make a point about scripture.
Who came up with the term Cenozoic? Evolutionary geologists. But you said you don't believe in evolution, so why make the appeal towards it?
If you make evolution part of your reasoning then your belief has far more to do with evolution than you may care to realize. It then becomes not a doctrine based solidly on what scripture says but more about a scrambling solution due to the perceived threat or 'facts' of evolution. Things only need a solution when they are real. Evolution is not real, its a strong delusion sent to mankind who do not want to hear God's word.
2 Thessalonians 2
11: For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie
12: and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Fossils were sorted by the world wide flood.

I feel this is enough text in one post and I have no more time anyway. I did notice what else you wrote and will be back to answer.

Thanks for the reply, your time is appreciated but i think your '100% certainty' might take a hammering. There is most definitely a prophetic tread that runs through Genesis 1 and 2, every verse every word. It is all scriptural-Paul the apostle referenced it as did our Lord Jesus Christ. This is NEW THING, you will not have heard it before. this is new insight, you just gotta read it.

Genesis Similitudes

 

[coffee4u]

Thanks for the reply, your time is appreciated but i think your '100% certainty' might take a hammering. There is most definitely a prophetic tread that runs through Genesis 1 and 2, every verse every word. It is all scriptural-Paul the apostle referenced it as did our Lord Jesus Christ. This is NEW THING, you will not have heard it before. this is new insight, you just gotta read it.

Genesis Similitudes

It's a shame you are not responding to what I said and asked. This feels like a very one sided conversation.

No clarification on what that paragraph was about.
No explanation of what coincidence you were referring to.
No scripture showing the previous world.
No answer to if you want me to reply about the scripture mentioned on that page.

There is no 'new' thing. God and His Word are unchanging.
“Your word, LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens” (Psalm 119:89).
“The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever” (Isaiah 40:8).
“I the Lord do not change” (Malachi 3:6).
“Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matthew 24:35).

I said I would be back to reply to bara vs Asha and so I am.
Often the claim is that bara refers to ex nihilo (Latin for “out of nothing”) and that asah means to make out of pre-existing material. This view is not up held up when reading scripture. Both words are used in the same chapter referring to the same event. A couple of early examples are:

Gen 1:1 (bara) created the heavens and earth
Gen 1:7 (asah) made the expanse between the waters above and below

Gen 1:21 (bara) created the sea creatures and birds
Gen 1:16 (asah) made the sun, moon and stars

There are easily a dozen times across the Old Testament when either word is used when referencing the same event. If bara only referred to 'out of nothing' and asah only referred to 'out of pre existing materials' then the divide should be clear to see and it should never be about the same event. This simply isn't shown.

No one is saying that a prophetic thread does not run through Genesis 1 and 2, of course it does. Adam and Eve were shown a partial glimpse of the new world to come at the end of the age. They had a taste of immortality, a taste of being without sin and a taste of walking with God. But it was indeed only a taste so that mankind would know what was lost and what was to come. This has nothing to do with the gap theory. The only reason the gap theory exists is to appeal to evolution.

 

[jameslouise]

It's a shame you are not responding to what I said and asked. This feels like a very one sided conversation.

No clarification on what that paragraph was about.
No explanation of what coincidence you were referring to.
No scripture showing the previous world.
No answer to if you want me to reply about the scripture mentioned on that page.

There is no 'new' thing. God and His Word are unchanging.
“Your word, LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens” (Psalm 119:89).
“The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever” (Isaiah 40:8).
“I the Lord do not change” (Malachi 3:6).
“Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matthew 24:35).

I said I would be back to reply to bara vs Asha and so I am.
Often the claim is that bara refers to ex nihilo (Latin for “out of nothing”) and that asah means to make out of pre-existing material. This view is not up held up when reading scripture. Both words are used in the same chapter referring to the same event. A couple of early examples are:

Gen 1:1 (bara) created the heavens and earth
Gen 1:7 (asah) made the expanse between the waters above and below

Gen 1:21 (bara) created the sea creatures and birds
Gen 1:16 (asah) made the sun, moon and stars

There are easily a dozen times across the Old Testament when either word is used when referencing the same event. If bara only referred to 'out of nothing' and asah only referred to 'out of pre existing materials' then the divide should be clear to see and it should never be about the same event. This simply isn't shown.

No one is saying that a prophetic thread does not run through Genesis 1 and 2, of course it does. Adam and Eve were shown a partial glimpse of the new world to come at the end of the age. They had a taste of immortality, a taste of being without sin and a taste of walking with God. But it was indeed only a taste so that mankind would know what was lost and what was to come. This has nothing to do with the gap theory. The only reason the gap theory exists is to appeal to evolution.

Hi Coffee4u , thanks for the detailed reply enjoyed reading it,your views are very similar to mine I thin btw. my reply was shorter because some of your questions show you have not read the link, which is fine and your choice, but please before we start just at least look a at this one graphic which will save me a thousand words. literally. (the red box in the graphic is just for you ) Genesis Similitudes

You suggest i should have answered all your questions individually and I think i agree with you, i should, so apologies, and here it is lets get popping!

I can see you fully believe what you say but I also believe 100% that you are misguided. I am guessing at some point be it through a book, a web site or a speaker you were showed the gap theory and it made sense. Perhaps before this you believed in evolution? They can be very persuasive, but they are wrong.
Before I became a Christian I believed in evolution, just your average everyday evolutionist. I am not and never have been interested in the science of it all, nether am I now. I am a scriptural creationist. Meaning I believe what I believe from scripture alone. I don't need creation science to back me up, even though they make some helpful and interesting points. Nor am I scriptural creationist due to some book or speaker. Which is why I said pure scripture in my first post. Too many people are scripture plus; plus their traditions, plus what their church says, plus this book or this speaker.
As a new Christian struggling with evolution vs what the Bible was telling me I came across the gap theory, I looked into it seriously, I looked at the scriptures they provided. It did not support the idea the way they were claiming. I had no other option but to become a 6 day creationist (no gap) and this has not changed or wavered in the past 30 years. Nothing that I have ever been shown by a gap proponent, or any other creation model such as flat earth (and I looked seriously into the scriptures for that as well) holds up to what the scriptures say

No I dont believe in Evolution either and the case I present is entirely scriptural. I humbly state, I believe I have been given new insight from The Holy Spirit. Lets forget about the evolution stuff then (but fossil are not evolution, fossils are fossils and I can explain them all btw)

Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12
11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” 12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

You mis-read my text, my text says Genesis day 3 NOT Genesis chapter 3. Let me repeat what prophecy is in verses 11 and 12 of Genesis 1

Jameslouise says:From Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12 and nothing else and not using New Testament scripture I can say:
Before salvation-God will send forth every man’s spirit, Jesus Christ as a man and The Holy Spirit. Man will not recognise Jesus as God until saved. Man will hear The Holy Spirits ‘voice’ in our spirit prior to salvation and The Holy Spirit will work upon our spirit. The Holy Spirit will come ‘loaded’ with the indwellings. The Holy Spirit will bear fruit. After salvation-Man will now recognise Jesus as a man and God after salvation. After Salvation the Holy Spirit will have given the ‘indwelling package’ to man. Man will be in the family of God. Some men will not be saved.
I can also say the first creation had grass, herbs and trees. All this from 2 amazingly designed bits of text. A coincidence??? No a work of majestic beauty Yes

The same happens every day, day 6 is the peak and even better than that is what the Garden of Eden reveals. If you do not believe me? then wait for it, yep that's right you just gotta read it. Genesis Similitudes It is too long for me to go through all of it here- I promise you it is there. JUST WAIT UNTIL YOU SEE 'DOUBLE CONSTRUCTS'?- Mind blown for me when i first saw it and I wondered how i missed it. PS it took me 10 years to put this together.

Coffee4u says I don't want to see another mans writing on a web page, show me through scripture. What scripture convinced you of the gap theory?
The whole of Genesis 1 and 2 and about 30 other bits all on the web site. It may be when you are in Heaven and you meet Solomon there , you had better not mention this conversation as he may call you a name Pro 18:13

"I can describe a biblical answer for every fossil layer. Can you? Please start by explaining why there is no human fossils before the Cenozoic?"

No, nor do I want to. When I rejected evolution 30 years ago I rejected all of it.

Do you realize what you just did? You just appealed to the world to make a point about scripture.
Who came up with the term Cenozoic? Evolutionary geologists. But you said you don't believe in evolution, so why make the appeal towards it?
If you make evolution part of your reasoning then your belief has far more to do with evolution than you may care to realize. It then becomes not a doctrine based solidly on what scripture says but more about a scrambling solution due to the perceived threat or 'facts' of evolution. Things only need a solution when they are real. Evolution is not real, its a strong delusion sent to mankind who do not want to hear God's word.
2 Thessalonians 2
11: For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie
12: and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Fossils are data and true , evolution in the interpretation of data and false

Fossils were sorted by the world wide flood

While I accept that floods can sift, they are not centrifuges, no flood can sift that well there would be humans all through all layers and a flood does not explain the bottom layer having 2 miles thick of single cell organisms. I can explain them. I thought you were not talking about fossils anyway?

No scripture showing the previous world

Every use of 'it was so' does and the whole of all of Genesis 1 and 2 require a parallel between man's spirit and a previous creation. Please please read it all

There is no 'new' thing. God and His Word are unchanging.
“Your word, LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens” (Psalm 119:89).
“The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever” (Isaiah 40:8).
“I the Lord do not change” (Malachi 3:6).
“Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matthew 24:35)

I think maybe 'new thing' is a poor choice by me, lets say new 'insight' instead.


Coffee4u I said I would be back to reply to bara vs Asha and so I am.
Often the claim is that bara refers to ex nihilo (Latin for “out of nothing”) and that asah means to make out of pre-existing material. This view is not up held up when reading scripture. Both words are used in the same chapter referring to the same event. A couple of early examples are:

Gen 1:1 (bara) created the heavens and earth
Gen 1:7 (asah) made the expanse between the waters above and below

Gen 1:21 (bara) created the sea creatures and birds
Gen 1:16 (asah) made the sun, moon and stars

There are easily a dozen times across the Old Testament when either word is used when referencing the same event. If bara only refereed to 'out of nothing' and asah only referred to 'out of pre existing materials' then the divide should be clear to see and it should never be about the same event. This simply isn't shown.


I agree with you 'bara; does not mean say ex nihilo nor did I say It did. I have not mentioned pre existing materails either at all but a pre existent design. If it is made the design is there from the first creation if is created it isnt.
'bara' a new design form God alone
'Asah' any thing God has worked on to completion, bara a subset of asah. this will work for any uses of these words.

The Hebrew scholars tell me that even the slopes of parts of the individual letters have meaning. Do you really think God would be sloppy with words or would he cram as much into as possible. as I said if they are interchangeable then they can be used like that So. Gen 2:3
‘he had rested from all the work which he had created and created’ would be valid. Really?

 

[coffee4u]

Hi Coffee4u , thanks for the detailed reply enjoyed reading it,your views are very similar to mine I thin btw. my reply was shorter because some of your questions show you have not read the link, which is fine and your choice, but please before we start just at least look a at this one graphic which will save me a thousand words. literally. (the red box in the graphic is just for you ) Genesis Similitudes

[/QUOTE]

I don't see how they are similar when you are proponent of the gap theory which is millions of years and an earth before this earth. The only reason to even think of million of years is to appeal to evolution. That is a deception so those perishing will perish. You can trust what the Bible says completely, and nothing in there talks about a previous world.
Everything was made in that 6 day time frame.

Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.
If there had been a previous world God would have told us so.

​

6 day creation is one earth that has undergone great change. The fall and the flood caused these changes not only in man but in animals and the world itself.
I don't view the days as anything but literal history. That isn't the type of prophesy that I meant.

Genesis Prophecies

A young traveler recently picked up my book Dinosaurs and the Bible from a convenience store and read the introduction to his friends. The group included Christians and atheists, so the topic sparked quite a discussion. Some objected to my statement “In studying creation materials, I found real...

www.icr.org

and

New earth

Eden points to a restored new Heavens and Earth.

creation.com

"Creation and new creation are the bookends of the Bible."

You suggest i should have answered all your questions individually and I think i agree with you, i should, so apologies, and here it is lets get popping!

No I dont believe in Evolution either and the case I present is entirely scriptural. I humbly state, I believe I have been given new insight from The Holy Spirit. Lets forget about the evolution stuff then (but fossil are not evolution, fossils are fossils and I can explain them all btw)

Thank you.
So why bring it up?

Fossils are fossils, there is nothing that needs explaning. They are simply dead creatures buried by the flood. There is nothing mysterious about them unless people try and make them so.

When people claim an age they are measuring the world we live in now because they believe the earths natural laws have always been what they measure now. But 6 day creation, young earth creation (that is 6-20 thousand years BTW not just 6 as some claim) say the earths properties changed with either the fall, the flood or with both.

"Geologists commonly use radiometric dating methods, based on the natural radioactive decay of certain elements such as potassium and carbon, as reliable clocks to date ancient events."

This does not take into account that the world changed completely from its newly created state. Just because the radioactive decay is known now does not mean this was the same before the flood and or before the fall. The present is not the key to the past because the past may as well have been a different planet.

You mis-read my text, my text says Genesis day 3 NOT Genesis chapter 3. Let me repeat what prophecy is in verses 11 and 12 of Genesis 1

Jameslouise says:From Genesis day 3 just verse 11 and 12 and nothing else and not using New Testament scripture I can say:
Before salvation-God will send forth every man’s spirit, Jesus Christ as a man and The Holy Spirit. Man will not recognise Jesus as God until saved. Man will hear The Holy Spirits ‘voice’ in our spirit prior to salvation and The Holy Spirit will work upon our spirit. The Holy Spirit will come ‘loaded’ with the indwellings. The Holy Spirit will bear fruit. After salvation-Man will now recognise Jesus as a man and God after salvation. After Salvation the Holy Spirit will have given the ‘indwelling package’ to man. Man will be in the family of God. Some men will not be saved.
I can also say the first creation had grass, herbs and trees. All this from 2 amazingly designed bits of text. A coincidence??? No a work of majestic beauty Yes

The same happens every day, day 6 is the peak and even better than that is what the Garden of Eden reveals. If you do not believe me? then wait for it, yep that's right you just gotta read it. Genesis Similitudes It is too long for me to go through all of it here- I promise you it is there. JUST WAIT UNTIL YOU SEE 'DOUBLE CONSTRUCTS'?- Mind blown for me when i first saw it and I wondered how i missed it. PS it took me 10 years to put this together.

Sorry, day 3.

So you are referring to:
11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

This passage also says nothing about the Holy Spirit or anything that you just said it did.
The pure reading of this is God creating the wild plants outside of the garden.
There is grave danger to be had of over spiritualizing plain pieces of scripture.

Coffee4u says I don't want to see another mans writing on a web page, show me through scripture. What scripture convinced you of the gap theory?
The whole of Genesis 1 and 2 and about 30 other bits all on the web site. It may be when you are in Heaven and you meet Solomon there , you had better not mention this conversation as he may call you a name Pro18:13

Again nothing in Genesis 1 or 2 talks about a previous world. I highly doubt without someone else putting those ideas together that you would have ever read the Bible and come up with what you are now saying. You have been influenced by the writer of that article. Only scripture is truth and scripture alone, not a mans interpration of it. We don't need articles to understand scripture only the scriptures (that is the Bible with acess to the Hebrew and Greek) and the Holy Spirit.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Not scripture plus worldsapartbiblically.com​

Fossils are data and true , evolution in the interpretation of data and false

It's required by the world so they can claim there is no God.

While I accept that floods can sift, they are not centrifuges, no flood can sift that well there would be humans all through all layers and a flood does not explain the bottom layer having 2 miles thick of single cell organisms. I can explain them. I thought you were not talking about fossils anyway?

Where Are All the Human Fossils?

At a recent Institute for Creation Research event, we passed out cards so the audience could submit questions for an upcoming Q&A session. Interestingly, several folks asked the same thing: Why don’t we find human remains in all the vast rock layers from Noah’s Flood? Though it’s a popular...

www.icr.org

Every use of 'it was so' does and the whole of all of Genesis 1 and 2 require a parallel between man's spirit and a previous creation. Please please read it all.

Completely disagree.

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.

wa yehi kēn, literally meaning, "and it was so." is no more or less than what it says.

I think maybe 'new thing' is a poor choice by me, lets say new 'insight' instead.

God's word doesn't change, He wasn't waiting around for centuries for a web site to show us the correct meaning. He wants all of mankind who have looked to him in faith to understand his word and to grow in it.

I'm sorry but this web site has lead you away from the pure word, spiritulizing things which were meant to be simple enough for children to understand. Obviously not all of the Bible is for children but God is not a God of confusion. Certain fundamental things such as creation are meant to be simple to understand by simply reading in faith with an open heart. The words in Genesis are simple and clear for the very reason that God knew how man would twist it. It had to be clear to be in stark contrast to evolution.

Coffee4u I said I would be back to reply to bara vs Asha and so I am.
Often the claim is that bara refers to ex nihilo (Latin for “out of nothing”) and that asah means to make out of pre-existing material. This view is not up held up when reading scripture. Both words are used in the same chapter referring to the same event. A couple of early examples are:

Gen 1:1 (bara) created the heavens and earth
Gen 1:7 (asah) made the expanse between the waters above and below

Gen 1:21 (bara) created the sea creatures and birds
Gen 1:16 (asah) made the sun, moon and stars

There are easily a dozen times across the Old Testament when either word is used when referencing the same event. If bara only refereed to 'out of nothing' and asah only referred to 'out of pre existing materials' then the divide should be clear to see and it should never be about the same event. This simply isn't shown.


I agree with you 'bara; does not mean say ex nihilo nor did I say It did. I have not mentioned pre existing materails either at all but a pre existent design. If it is made the design is there from the first creation if is created it isnt.
'bara' a new design form God alone
'Asah' any thing God has worked on to completion, bara a subset of asah. this will work for any uses of these words.

You didn't no, other gap theorists on here have claimed this.

The Hebrew scholars tell me that even the slopes of parts of the individual letters have meaning. Do you really think God would be sloppy with words or would he cram as much into as possible. as I said if they are interchangeable then they can be used like that So. Gen 2:3
‘he had rested from all the work which he had created and created’ would be valid. Really?

Except it doesn't say that. Instead of trusting this man and his web site trust the scriptures. By scriptures I mean the Hebrew. The Bible is an English translation. While it's easy to read sometimes the wording isn't as exact as it should be.

Genies 2:3
And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Here the Hebrew says bara (בָּרָ֥א) and la'asovt (לַעֲשֹֽׂות׃) not created and created.
We can trust God to reveal the truth by the plain reading of his word, no website needed.

 

[coffee4u]

I had another look over that site.

John 7:38, KJV: He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
Trying to link that somehow to rivers of Eden as being a hint of a gap? No, people are reading into and making things up. It is grasping at straw in a desperate attempt to prove a gap that isn't there.

John 7:38 is is far more likely that Jesus was referring back to Proverbs 18:4 or Zechariah 14:8

Proverbs 18:4 The words of a man’s mouth are deep waters; the wellspring of wisdom is a flowing brook.

Zechariah 14:8 8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

A stream or spring is a common theme in the Bible. living water is a symbol for salvation and a knowledge of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
It is far more likly a look to the future than some unknown past world.

Revelation 22:1-2

Eden Restored​

22 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.


The real question is why are people so desperate for a gap? I believe they think science has proven evolution and they are scrambling for a way to marry in those million of years and in so doing are twisting plain simple scriptures.
I say its lack of faith in the scriptures as written.

Lack of faith in God's pure word.

Don't believe in evolution?
Don't add in million of years. What are they needed for?

Matthew 26:41
“Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

The temptation is often our intellect. If science says millions of years and everyone believes it surely this knowledge must be true. Then we are left with reinterpreting the scriptures to fit, to say this is a new revelation. There is no new revelation just as there is no new Christ and no new word.

Matthew 24:23
At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it.

The intellect is then satisfied but at its heart it is lack of faith in what God told us as well as pride.
“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. Doubt in God's word started right there in the garden.
And pride is what led Adam to do as he thought best and to take and eat the fruit Eve offered.

It is the intellect that will sink us like Peter walking on the water, even when it is dressed up in spirituality.

 

[jameslouise]

Hi coffee, thanks for the reply, enjoyed reading it but I am going to parry you rebuffs, counter and today deliver the knock out

I don't see how they are similar when you are proponent of the gap theory which is millions of years and an earth before this earth. The only reason to even think of million of years is to appeal to evolution

Why do you keep saying I do this because I believe in evolution? I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,.7 times for completion. Even if i did not know Gap Theory is true I would bet be an evolutionist, it is very poor science.

If there had been a previous world God would have told us so

He did

Your two links to 'Genesis Prophecies and 'New earth' were interesting but nothing to do with the prophetic thread I am promoting.

So you are referring to:
11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

This passage also says nothing about the Holy Spirit or anything that you just said it did.
The pure reading of this is God creating the wild plants outside of the garden.
There is grave danger to be had of over spiritualizing plain pieces of scripture

The pure meaning is absolutely true but also in addition God uses very specific wording to prophesy///
So note the way day 3 just says the earth brought forth- no God made statement is used, why?
Herb yielding seed-what is that about? Why this name?
the fruit tree yielding fruit-why this name don't all plants have seed in them? Why not say just plants?

Wait a minute? Grass and herbs are used in the Bible as a metaphor for man several times: Grass often likened to ‘flesh’ (Isaiah 40:6-7) (1 Peter 1:24) and the repeating quote of herbs and grass for man: (2 Kings 19:26) (Isaiah 37:27). ‘Seed’ is often used to refer to the redeemed (Gal 3:16) (Gal 3:29)
So, a herb(man) who yields seed (the redeemed) is a logical name for Jesus.
Wait a minute? a 'fruit tree yielding fruit' doesn't The Holy spirit have a prime function of being fruitful?Is God using specific terms here too? I s a tree the biggest thing that he can use within the category of plants on day 3 to symbolism God? Is there a link to the trees in Eden being educational? Is the Holy Spirit Educational when he acts on man and begins our salvation process? The fruit yielding tree is logical metaphor for The Holy Spirit. Note the way the His 'seed' is in himself-the redeemed' in dwelling package of Jesus and The Holy Spirit'is carried with him- He is loaded and ready.
Note the way this seed' is in' Gen 1:11 but changes to 'was in' in Gen 1:12. i.e. the package has been given out to man and aint there no more. Why is the herb yielding seed a kind in verse 12 and not in verse 11? This link will provide the answer, i have put a note to you on it. This will introduce to 'double constructs'. This is the body blow- the knock out will follow but you have to read this first please

Genesis Similitudes

You may have to press refresh button to see your message.

Except it doesn't say that. Instead of trusting this man and his web site trust the scriptures. By scriptures I mean the Hebrew. The Bible is an English translation. While it's easy to read sometimes the wording isn't as exact as it should be

Absolutely

Genies 2:3
And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Here the Hebrew says bara (בָּרָ֥א) and la'asovt (לַעֲשֹֽׂות׃) not created and created.
We can trust God to reveal the truth by the plain reading of his word, no website needed.

I was making the point that if you consider these words 'make and create (asah and bara' interchangeable which is what you believe, then my examples are valid translations. Of course that is not what it says in the Bible , they mean very very specific things. 'Asah' anything God has worked on, 'bara' a new design from God- a subset of 'asah'.

I had another look over that site.

John 7:38, KJV: He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
Trying to link that somehow to rivers of Eden as being a hint of a gap? No, people are reading into and making things up. It is grasping at straw in a desperate attempt to prove a gap that isn't there.

John 7:38 is is far more likely that Jesus was referring back to Proverbs 18:4 or Zechariah 14:8

Proverbs 18:4 The words of a man’s mouth are deep waters; the wellspring of wisdom is a flowing brook.

Zechariah 14:8 8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

A stream or spring is a common theme in the Bible. living water is a symbol for salvation and a knowledge of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
It is far more likly a look to the future than some unknown past world.

Revelation 22:1-2

Eden Restored​

22 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nation

I loved this reply and the scripture you supplied with it. all the scripture is mentioned on the web site BTW. The Bible does is indeed describe a river of life running for the throne and I think streams of living water flowing out of our bellies is 'in his image' as those waters originate from God the Father. I absolutely agree that these verse do provide a slight parallel to man.
But nowhere near as good ad Eden. remember the whole metaphor- the kosmos-ruah metaphor as described by Paul 2 Cor 4:6 is planet earth represents man's base spirit. So, parallels galore???

1. God planted a garden and made to grow- God plants the indwellings into our spirit Gen 2:7
2. God puts man in the garden (note the way he does this twice (Gen 2:8 and Gen 2:15)- We are In Christ and The Holy spirit. (Col 1;28, 1 Joh 4:13)
3. Gen 2:15 man is directed to 'dress and to keep it' We are instructed to keep our body as a temple for the Holy Spirit Cor 6:19-20
4. A river flows out of Eden(not the garden) and then waters the garden. Streams of living water flow out of our bellies and then are 'enhanced' by the indwellings and this leads to spiritual gifts Joh 7:38
5. The Rivers are called Pison, Gihon, Hiddekel and Euphrates meaning overflowing, bursting forth, rapid and fruitful respectively. the streams of living water will be likewise- note the use of fruitful- a Holy Spirit trait.
6. note the way God plants trees that are good for food and tell right and wrong - the Holy Spirit guides us right form wrong and gives us spiritual meat too (Romans 12:43) (1 Corinthians 14:26)
7. You cannot eat from the tree life or you will die- you cannot blaspheme The Holy Spirit or you will die

and there are many more Genesis Similitudes

Which one do you think Jesus referred to? It only works with Gap Theory, born again earth born again man. I suggest Jesus confirms a Gap Theory-the knock out

 

[coffee4u]

Hi coffee, thanks for the reply, enjoyed reading it but I am going to parry you rebuffs, counter and today deliver the knock out

Why do you keep saying I do this because I believe in evolution? I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,I do not believe in evolution,.7 times for completion. Even if i did not know Gap Theory is true I would bet be an evolutionist, it is very poor science.

Okay, so you don't believe in evolution but you believe in millions of years. So the question is:
Why, why believe in millions of years?

If this believe has everything to do with scripture and nothing to do with science then prove it through scripture.
I'm sorry but I think you are fooling yourself. If science had never said millions of years you would not be sitting here saying millions of years, face it.

He did

No, he didn't. I am still waiting for you to show me which scriptures state this.

Your two links to 'Genesis Prophecies and 'New earth' were interesting but nothing to do with the prophetic thread I am promoting.

I never said it did.
I said this is the type of prophesy that I was referring too.

The pure meaning is absolutely true but also in addition God uses very specific wording to prophesy///
So note the way day 3 just says the earth brought forth- no God made statement is used, why?
Herb yielding seed-what is that about? Why this name?
the fruit tree yielding fruit-why this name don't all plants have seed in them? Why not say just plants?

God uses different language over plants because they are not alive in the Biblical sense. He was making a distinction and there are more distinctions between plants and life as you go through scripture. It's possible such a distinction was needed because plant offerings cannot take away sin. That requires blood. Plants have neither the breath of life or blood. The Bible also never talks of plants dying either, they whither or fade. I can imagine people would have liked to have brought a plant offering to God to have their sins forgiven, the wording prevented that.

Leviticus 17:14 “the life of every creature is in its blood”

Hebrews 9:22 22 And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.
When plant offerings were made it wasn't for atonement, but worship. An important distinction.​

​

​

Wait a minute? Grass and herbs are used in the Bible as a metaphor for man several times: Grass often likened to ‘flesh’ (Isaiah 40:6-7) (1 Peter 1:24) and the repeating quote of herbs and grass for man: (2 Kings 19:26) (Isaiah 37:27). ‘Seed’ is often used to refer to the redeemed (Gal 3:16) (Gal 3:29)
So, a herb(man) who yields seed (the redeemed) is a logical name for Jesus.
Wait a minute? a 'fruit tree yielding fruit' doesn't The Holy spirit have a prime function of being fruitful?Is God using specific terms here too? I s a tree the biggest thing that he can use within the category of plants on day 3 to symbolism God? Is there a link to the trees in Eden being educational? Is the Holy Spirit Educational when he acts on man and begins our salvation process? The fruit yielding tree is logical metaphor for The Holy Spirit. Note the way the His 'seed' is in himself-the redeemed' in dwelling package of Jesus and The Holy Spirit'is carried with him- He is loaded and ready.
Note the way this seed' is in' Gen 1:11 but changes to 'was in' in Gen 1:12. i.e. the package has been given out to man and aint there no more. Why is the herb yielding seed a kind in verse 12 and not in verse 11? This link will provide the answer, i have put a note to you on it. This will introduce to 'double constructs'. This is the body blow- the knock out will follow but you have to read this first please

Genesis Similitudes

You may have to press refresh button to see your message.

Isaiah 40:6-7
6 A voice says, “Cry out.”
And I said, “What shall I cry?”
“All people are like grass,
and all their faithfulness is like the flowers of the field.
7 The grass withers and the flowers fall,
because the breath of the Lord blows on them.
Surely the people are grass.

We can all tell that this is poetic and not literal so its a different type of scripture.
People are like grass is not referring to their flesh but how they sway about changing their minds, they are fickle, one minute they profess faith the next they have doubts. Which is why their faithfulness are like flowers of the fields. Here one day and gone the next.

1 Peter 1:24
People are like grass; their beauty is like a flower in the field. The grass withers and the flower fades.
Same form of language. Its talking about how fickle people can be.
(notice also for plants it is wither and fade not die) ​

​

​

Absolutely

I was making the point that if you consider these words 'make and create (asah and bara' interchangeable which is what you believe, then my examples are valid translations. Of course that is not what it says in the Bible , they mean very very specific things. 'Asah' anything God has worked on, 'bara' a new design from God- a subset of 'asah'.


I loved this reply and the scripture you supplied with it. all the scripture is mentioned on the web site BTW. The Bible does is indeed describe a river of life running for the throne and I think streams of living water flowing out of our bellies is 'in his image' as those waters originate from God the Father. I absolutely agree that these verse do provide a slight parallel to man.
But nowhere near as good ad Eden. remember the whole metaphor- the kosmos-ruah metaphor as described by Paul 2 Cor 4:6 is planet earth represents man's base spirit. So, parallels galore???

1. God planted a garden and made to grow- God plants the indwellings into our spirit Gen 2:7
2. God puts man in the garden (note the way he does this twice (Gen 2:8 and Gen 2:15)- We are In Christ and The Holy spirit. (Col 1;28, 1 Joh 4:13)
3. Gen 2:15 man is directed to 'dress and to keep it' We are instructed to keep our body as a temple for the Holy Spirit Cor 6:19-20
4. A river flows out of Eden(not the garden) and then waters the garden. Streams of living water flow out of our bellies and then are 'enhanced' by the indwellings and this leads to spiritual gifts Joh 7:38
5. The Rivers are called Pison, Gihon, Hiddekel and Euphrates meaning overflowing, bursting forth, rapid and fruitful respectively. the streams of living water will be likewise- note the use of fruitful- a Holy Spirit trait.
6. note the way God plants trees that are good for food and tell right and wrong - the Holy Spirit guides us right form wrong and gives us spiritual meat too (Romans 12:43) (1 Corinthians 14:26)
7. You cannot eat from the tree life or you will die- you cannot blaspheme The Holy Spirit or you will die

and there are many more Genesis Similitudes

And I disagree. They have taken scriptures and claimed it says such and such when it does not.
None of those verses hints at anything like a pre world.
Just because someone claims it does and puts it on a web page does not make it true.
You are then back to why? Why would God have made a pre world?
Why would anyone even think of a pre world? Again we are back to the reason, its due to science. No man would have ever come up with the idea of a pre world if science didn't claim millions of years.

Which one do you think Jesus referred to? It only works with Gap Theory, born again earth born again man. I suggest Jesus confirms a Gap Theory-the knock out

It has nothing to do with any gap theory. Jesus never mentions or even hints at a gap theory. The only person making up a gap theory is the maker of this web site.
God made a perfect world to give mankind a taste of the world to come. Man fell as God knew he would and the world fell too. The global flood changed the world once more. Jesus came to this post flood world to redeem mankind. Born of a virgin so as to be without Adam's sin. Jesus was the perfect blood sacrifce to atone for the sins of mankind. He then went back to heaven to remain there until the second coming and the end of the age. There will then be a new world.
This gap does nothing, is nothing, and fits no where in scripture because it never existed except in the minds of men who desperately need things to be more complicated then they are so they can claim THEY figured it out.
“Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3–4)

 

[jameslouise]

Okay, so you don't believe in evolution but you believe in millions of years. So the question is:
Why, why believe in millions of years?

If this believe has everything to do with scripture and nothing to do with science then prove it through scripture.
I'm sorry but I think you are fooling yourself. If science had never said millions of years you would not be sitting here saying millions of years, face it.



No, he didn't. I am still waiting for you to show me which scriptures state this.


I never said it did.
I said this is the type of prophesy that I was referring too.



God uses different language over plants because they are not alive in the Biblical sense. He was making a distinction and there are more distinctions between plants and life as you go through scripture. It's possible such a distinction was needed because plant offerings cannot take away sin. That requires blood. Plants have neither the breath of life or blood. The Bible also never talks of plants dying either, they whither or fade. I can imagine people would have liked to have brought a plant offering to God to have their sins forgiven, the wording prevented that.

Leviticus 17:14 “the life of every creature is in its blood”

Hebrews 9:22 22 And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.​

When plant offerings were made it wasn't for atonement, but worship. An important distinction.​

​

​

Isaiah 40:6-7​

6 A voice says, “Cry out.”​

And I said, “What shall I cry?”​

“All people are like grass,​

and all their faithfulness is like the flowers of the field.​

7 The grass withers and the flowers fall,​

because the breath of the Lord blows on them.​

Surely the people are grass.​

​

We can all tell that this is poetic and not literal so its a different type of scripture. ​

People are like grass is not referring to their flesh but how they sway about changing their minds, they are fickle, one minute they profess faith the next they have doubts. Which is why their faithfulness are like flowers of the fields. Here one day and gone the next. ​

​

1 Peter 1:24​

People are like grass; their beauty is like a flower in the field. The grass withers and the flower fades.​

Same form of language. Its talking about how fickle people can be. ​

(notice also for plants it is wither and fade not die) ​

​

​

And I disagree. They have taken scriptures and claimed it says such and such when it does not.
None of those verses hints at anything like a pre world.
Just because someone claims it does and puts it on a web page does not make it true.
You are then back to why? Why would God have made a pre world?
Why would anyone even think of a pre world? Again we are back to the reason, its due to science. No man would have ever come up with the idea of a pre world if science didn't claim millions of years.



It has nothing to do with any gap theory. Jesus never mentions or even hints at a gap theory. The only person making up a gap theory is the maker of this web site.
God made a perfect world to give mankind a taste of the world to come. Man fell as God knew he would and the world fell too. The global flood changed the world once more. Jesus came to this post flood world to redeem mankind. Born of a virgin so as to be without Adam's sin. Jesus was the perfect blood sacrifce to atone for the sins of mankind. He then went back to heaven to remain there until the second coming and the end of the age. There will then be a new world.
This gap does nothing, is nothing, and fits no where in scripture because it never existed except in the minds of men who desperately need things to be more complicated then they are so they can claim THEY figured it out.
“Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3–4)

Hi Coffee, I am going to ask you again if the parallelism in day 3 is by chance or by design?
Remember a herb yielding seed-A logical metaphor for Jesus
Fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind- a logical metaphor for the Holy Spirit
Grass/herbs- used in several places in the Bible as a metaphor for man
Seed- used often in the Bible as a metaphor for the redeemed spirit
A coincidence? Really?
Lets looks at Gen 1:29 and see if this metaphor extends to other verses?
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat
Note how a new term is use, not a seed yielding herb but now a seed 'bearing'herb. i.e. men that bear a redeemed spirit- I suggest this is the saved.
Note how the Fruit tree yielding fruit is now every ( so more than 1) tree in which is the fruit of the (aforementioned) Fruit tree yielding fruit. Given that this fruit yielding tree represents the Holy Spirit, then in consistency with this the fruit of this tree is anything that The Holy Spirit will present, so, Jesus, God the Father and understanding of The written Word of God would be these 'trees'.
So with that in mind this verse describes, as well as, man being a vegetarian in the literal needing plants for 'meat' but also that saved man (you) will need other saved men (herb bearing seeds), and The Holy Spirit presenting Jesus, God the Father and the written word of God for spiritual growth. Thus prophesying New Testament doctrine.
What are the chances? Another coincidence??? (Romans 12:43) (1 Corinthians 14:26)
(1 Corinthians 10:3) (John 6:48). (2 Timothy 3:16-17). (1 Peter 2:2).

It happens in every verse and every word of Genesis 1 and 2???
Come on coffee4u?

Genesis Similitudes

 

[coffee4u]

Hi Coffee, I am going to ask you again if the parallelism in day 3 is by chance or by design?
Remember a herb yielding seed-A logical metaphor for Jesus

I don't know what to tell you except your mind has been over taken by that web site, by the man who wrote it. Put aside that website and what that man says from your mind and re read the pure scripture.​

There is nothing in there indicating a gap. It is nothing more than God creating plants. There is no parallelism.

11Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth vegetation: seed-bearing plants and fruit trees, each bearing fruit with seed according to its kind.” And it was so. 12The earth produced vegetation: seed-bearing plants according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

Over to the Hebrew
plant e·sev herb, herbage
yielding zo·re·a' to sow, scatter seed
seed ze·ra a sowing, seed, offspring

Jesus talked about "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field" So you could say reading Genesis 1 reminds us that God sewed good seed in the garden, that the garden was perfect. But that was literal seed, not spiritual seed. Genesis 1 is literal history. No gap, no previous world.

Fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind- a logical metaphor for the Holy Spirit

No. It was a literal fruit tree.
Again you can take a New Testament verse (spiritual) about fruit and go back to the garden (literal)
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
And go back to Genesis and like before say this reminds us of perfection and of the new world to come. But nothing in that speaks of a gap or a previous world. The only parallel is the garden of Eden to the new world to come. That is the recuring theme. There was nothing before this, no references back to it. The gap does not exist and no scripture indicates it.

The NT verses are not even metaphor for the Holy Spirit as such but rather the Holy Spirit working through us.

Grass/herbs- used in several places in the Bible as a metaphor for man

Yes, it does, but in Genesis it is talking about literal grass that God created.

Seed- used often in the Bible as a metaphor for the redeemed spirit

Not in Genesis.

A coincidence? Really?

There was no coincidence so referring back to a non existing coincidence does not help.
There has to be literal plants, grass, trees first to be able to use such items in other ways. When the psalm says "The trees clap their hands' we know it is referring to leaves blowing in the wind and we know this because we know of literal leaves waving in the breeze on literal trees. The literal has to come first to make poetry, metaphor, parable later. Genesis comes first because it was the creation of these literal things. Genesis is literal not metaphor.

There is only one reason to claim Genesis is metaphor and that is to erase it as literal history. Because people do not want it to be literal history. If Genesis is literal history then God creating over 6 days, literal history. The garden, real place. Adam and Eve real people. The fall a real event. Satan a real enemy. Sin and death the real consequences of real events.

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat
Note how a new term is use, not a seed yielding herb but now a seed 'bearing'herb. i.e. men that bear a redeemed spirit- I suggest this is the saved.

'Bearing'herb is an English translation. The Hebrew does not say that,
The Hebrew uses the word fruit fe·ri-

Even if it did say bearing herb, which is does not, it still means 'this is what this plant produces as food' So no there is no connection to a redeemed spirit.
The scriptures do not say that.
That is one mans interpretation.

Note how the Fruit tree yielding fruit is now every ( so more than 1) tree in which is the fruit of the (aforementioned) Fruit tree yielding fruit. Given that this fruit yielding tree represents the Holy Spirit, then in consistency with this the fruit of this tree is anything that The Holy Spirit will present, so, Jesus, God the Father and understanding of The written Word of God would be these 'trees'.

No it does not represent the Holy Spirit. You only think it does because some web site told you it does.
There is no one singular tree, it is plural from the start so there is no change.

I have given na·tat·ti to give, put, set
you every kol- the whole, all
plant e·sev herb, herbage

and every kol- the whole, all
tree ha·'etz

So with that in mind this verse describes, as well as, man being a vegetarian in the literal needing plants for 'meat' but also that saved man (you) will need other saved men (herb bearing seeds), and The Holy Spirit presenting Jesus, God the Father and the written word of God for spiritual growth. Thus prophesying New Testament doctrine.
What are the chances? Another coincidence??? (Romans 12:43) (1 Corinthians 14:26)
(1 Corinthians 10:3) (John 6:48). (2 Timothy 3:16-17). (1 Peter 2:2).

When you start from an incorrect position that only magnifies your mistakes. Since Genesis does not say what you claim it says.
The verse in Genesis describes how God created and that is all.

There is no such verses as Romans 12:43 Romans 12 stops at verses 21!

1 Corinthians 14:26
26 How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

1 Corinthians 10:3
3 all ate the same spiritual food,

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

1 Peter 2:2
2 as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby,
All wonderful scriptures and nothing to do with Genesis.

It happens in every verse and every word of Genesis 1 and 2???
Come on coffee4u?

Genesis Similitudes

The only thing happening in every verse is God telling us how he created the world. That the world was created in perfection and that mankind ruined it. You have taken something meant to be simple enough or babes to understand and spiritulized it to make it try and say something it does not.

To get back to your main point which was "There is a gap of millions of years" None of what you presented above speaks to that in any way. Instead you have made claims that herbs and trees point to the Holy Spirit, Jesus and redemption. While the topics of the Holy Spirit, Jesus and redemption are important ones they have nothing to do with the gap theory.

So still waiting on scripture claiming God made a pre world.
Also still waiting for why he would do such a thing.

 

[jameslouise]

So still waiting on scripture claiming God made a pre world.
Also still waiting for why he would do such a thing

Every use of 'it was so' is referring to a previous world and simultaneously Adam's/man's fallen spirit,(it used to be that way) that's why 'it was so' is never used for man or with the word created. (As man is not in the first creation)
He did such a thing to testify to CHRIST, two staggering beautiful creations all testify to Christ's work.
Oh and also when you meet Paul in heaven you probably ought to tell him that he was wrong to parallel God shining light on Earth to God shining light into our spirit/soul. 2 Cor 4:6. Tell him the parallel is not there and doesn't exist (not sure how it got in the Bible then btw?)
Oh and here are another 51 other coincidences for you?

51 questions