Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It can be a lonely thing. I hope you have friends and family who are supportive. I have had people tell me things like, "If you were really saved you would know the Bible is literally true." And such profound conversation stoppers like, "My grandparents weren't monkeys!"
This is not finalized. These are the current principles I am working with from scripture and nature.
A: The Original Creation Genesis 1:1
1. At some point, very likely 14.4 billion years ago, God spoke the "stuff" of creation into existence. This was nothing more than space and primitive matter. I interpret "heavens and the earth" as space and matter.
2. Over a period of billions of years, God molded the universe into the galaxies, black holes, nebula, and planets. All this occurred prior to Geneses 1:3.
3. God, in the formation of the planets, infuses the ground and sea with the functionality to generate life. God guides the process though development stages.
4. God presides over a period of ages we refer to as prehistoric. These ages are not detailed in the scripture. These include all the geologic periods referred to by paleontologists and archeologists.
5. Animals and other creatures develop from the Word-infused earth and sea. Starting with microscopic organisms emerging from the land and water, God allows the kinds to develop on their own, only intervening when He desires changes in individual species. Ultimately, a form of man comes into being.
6. At some point, we surmise this to be 65 million years ago. Satan, as the ruler of the earth, rebels along with 1/3 of the angels. The earth is destroyed to the point where its ability to generate life is extinguished.
B: The Gap period between the fall of Satan and the restructuring of the earth.
7. The Spirit broods over the earth. Gen 1:2
C: The Reformation of the earth and recreation of life.
8. We are now at Genesis 1:2 in the Genesis process. The earth is in a state of absolute chaos because of the rebellion of Satan and the resultant destruction of the earth. It is said to be without form and void. It is from here that the earth reformed which is detailed from Gen 1:3 to Gen 2:6
9. The reformation process begins with the restoration of light and the firmament, the clearing of the chaos, and the establishment of seas and land.
10. God re-invigorated the land and the sea to once again bring forth life. As nature shows us, the first elements of life issued from the primordial land and sea, and began to ascend to higher forms all according to the plans and purposes of God. God intervened where it was needed to guide life into acceptable forms of life.
11. Eventually one of these higher forms of life was the animal man described in the closing verses of Gen 1. This is NOT Adam and Eve.
12. God created Adam and Even from the dust of the earth and set them in the garden Unlike the animal man created in the closing verses of Gen 1, Adam and Eve were created by the direct hand and breath of God.
13. Eventually the "animal man" cross bred with the "God breathed man." This is where the sons of Adam got their wives.
From the perspective of science here are a few objections:
Point 1 Why 14.4 billion years for the initiation of the universe instead of the standard scientific estimate of 13.7 billion years? No reason is given for this deviation and I think one should avoid deviating from standard estimates unless there is a sound reason to do so.
I guess I just took the most recent date infallible science has put forth, give or take an infallible billion.
Point 6 (& 11) I am not sure what you mean by the earth having the capacity to generate life. Are you envisioning forms of life originating by spontaneous generation. If not, can you clarify what is meant?
I mean that God spoke and enabled the ground and the water of the sea to naturally and automatically generate the materials of life.
Also why attribute the K-T extinction event to the work of Satan and not also the much more devastating end-Permian extinction? The K-T mass extinction is only one of 6 (including the current one) and was not the worst. What light, what firmament would need to be restored? I realize these ideas make sense in the framework of Gap theology, but they don't make sense as scientific concepts. The K-T extinction affected the earth, not the sun or stars or the rest of the sky.
Good points... need to look into these and other like events.
I have a few theological differences as well--strictly personal and not speaking for anyone else.
Point 5. I never like wording that seems to say God is doing nothing except for occasional interventions. Scripture presents God as always present, always active, whether or not an "intervention" is required. It seems to me that when we restrict God to particular types of interactions with the created order, we tend to forget this. We lose sight of the grand concept of God's everyday providential care of his creation. I don't think we should speak of the evolutionary pathways of creatures as happening "on their own" as if God had nothing to do with it. Speaking providentially, God always has something to do with it.
I agree...
Points 11 & 12
Personally, I don't think we can actually separate the creation of humanity from the creation of Adam and Eve. The creation account of Genesis 2 seems clearly to be speaking of the primordial creation of humanity through the creation of the first human couple. Obviously, if we agree humanity evolved we need to interpret this as primordial myth rather than historical event. For this reason I don't think it necessary that Adam and Eve be a particular, historical couple. But even if they were, I would still say they evolved rather than being created directly from dust as a separate, if similar, species.
I understand what you are saying and believed that for some time. But there are differences. Like when animals and birds were created. In chapter 1 we see bird and animals being generated on different days. Yet in chapter two they were both generated at the same time. In chapter 1 the birds came on the sea day, while in chapter 2 they came on the earth day. Different days. Different mediums, different methods. There may be other differences between chapter one and two. I think chapter 2 introduces the "genreations" concept. No such thing found in chapter 1.
So those are my perceptions of some weaknesses in your framework. Take them FWIW. or reject them as you see fit.
I think it is great that you are making an effort to develop this framework in the first place.
I guess I just took the most recent date infallible science has put forth, give or take an infallible billion.
I mean that God spoke and enabled the ground and the water of the sea to naturally and automatically generate the materials of life.
I understand what you are saying and believed that for some time. But there are differences. Like when animals and birds were created. In chapter 1 we see bird and animals being generated on different days. Yet in chapter two they were both generated at the same time. In chapter 1 the birds came on the sea day, while in chapter 2 they came on the earth day. Different days. Different mediums, different methods. There may be other differences between chapter one and two. I think chapter 2 introduces the "genreations" concept. No such thing found in chapter 1.
I sure hope you are being ironic. You know science is not infallible. But in any case, if you took 14.4 as "the most recent date...put forth" you are far behind time. Dates in the range of 13.4-13.7 are much more recent findings.
I agree... I just wish they would realize they are not infallible. I cannot count the times I have been "smited by academia and science" as they insisted that anyone who disagreed with their every word was a flat earther. Truth is there is a LOT of arrogance in the scientific community. I work in a state college and I see it all the time. Hardly a day goes by that someone is putting down people who dare disagree with their pronouncements.
Ok, sounds like you haven't fully worked out just what this would look like yet. I know it comes from Gap theology, but the idea that the earth once had, then lost, then had restored, the ability to generate life is mind-boggling outside of that conception. The materials of life are chemicals. Everything necessary to life (proteins, lipids, DNA, etc.) are simply complex chemical molecules. So, to me losing the capacity to generate life would translate into losing the capacity of forming complex chemical molecules, because if those molecules can be formed and remain stable enough to interact with each other, then life is possible.
I was just discussing this with a fellow who stated that it is no surprised that life erupts spontaneously from nature. He pretty much said the same thing here. I suggested that he was correct, but that the reason nature generated life was because the creator created it in such a way that it would "bring forth life."
Yes, there are definitely differences between the opening creation accounts. More than enough IMO not to see them as originally part of the same story. I just don't find Gap theology a convincing way to explain the differences.
This is why I placed so much into the time prior to the gap. The gap is just the period of time between the last great extinction up to the re-creation.
gluadys said:I sure hope you are being ironic. You know science is not infallible.
I agree... I just wish they would realize they are not infallible.
I cannot count the times I have been "smited by academia and science" as they insisted that anyone who disagreed with their every word was a flat earther.
I have never heard a single scientist claim infallibility. I don't know where the perception that science claims infallibility comes from. .
It comes from the continual attacks by science on people of faith. We are constantly told that if we do agree with them then we must be flat earthers. That action can only be taken by those who think their statements are beyond question.
I recall years ago science told us that if we did not believe the universe was 12 billion years old, then we were ignorant.
Then they changed it to 13 billion... and then we were ignorant again.
Then they changed it to 13.4 billion, and yes once again we were all ignorant.
Then there were the bones found in England that proved there was a missing link, and if you disagreed... you were ignorant of the facts and a flat earther.
Opps.... turned out to be a hoax. But we were still ignorant anyways.
Then there was the missing link in China... and if you disagreed you were ignorant and a flat earther...
Opps.... turned out to be a pig tooth.
And of course we were all still ignorant anyways,
I suppose this post will prove I am ignorant and a flat earther.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?