Progressive's view on creation?

[TrustAndObey]

I won't debate, I won't even look at ya funny.... I'm just curious what the Progressive Adventist stand on creation is?

God bless!
~Lainie

 

[HoneyDew]

Well, since you asked ...
I can't talk for anyone else, but here is what I believe:
I believe in an Old Earth Creation. That is, the Earth might be millions of years old, along with the rest of the universe. That, in NO way, means I believe in evolution. I believe this universe has a Divine and Personal Creator-God.
The reason why I changed my beliefs stem from reading Genesis chapter 1 and 2 and realizing that sections of the related tales do not make sense to me in this century. I cannot ignore scientific evidence. It would appear that the view is that of a geocentric universe, that is, the Earth is central and the other heavenly bodies were created to complement and enhance life on Earth, such as bringing light, etc.
(Rushing tonight, but I can give a full answer tomorrow when I return.)

 

[moicherie]

Since i take issue with this division but i'll answer anyway- i go with Genesis 1 life on this earth created perhaps 6000 years but the planet itself and the water on it perhaps millions after all the waters was here before anything else as per Genesis 1

 

[jabechler]

Sorry, but need to interject. Gen 1:2 the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep.Gen 1:6 ...let there be firmament... Even science agrees without a sun and without an atmosphere water could not have existed and of course no life. Please be caustious in what parts of evolutionary theory we attribute to fact in faith. I love science and understand science that shows the power of our Creator. But faith will always superseed science when science raises questions which it cannot answer.

 

[moicherie]

Sorry, but need to interject. Gen 1:2 the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep.Gen 1:6 ...let there be firmament... Even science agrees without a sun and without an atmosphere water could not have existed and of course no life. Please be caustious in what parts of evolutionary theory we attribute to fact in faith. I love science and understand science that shows the power of our Creator. But faith will always superseed science when science raises questions which it cannot answer.

How would you explain the Spirit moving on the face of the deep before God said Let there be light etc, how would you explain the existence of a planet there is no record of the actual planets creation only a record of what was created on the planet which suggests to me the empty rock could have been around for ages.

 

[jabechler]

How would you explain the Spirit moving on the face of the deep before God said Let there be light etc, how would you explain the existence of a planet there is no record of the actual planets creation only a record of what was created on the planet which suggests to me the empty rock could have been around for ages.

In Genesis God said let there be light....... the sun and the moon. how does science account for planatery position and alligment with no sun and no moon.

 

[jabechler]

Well, since you asked ...
I can't talk for anyone else, but here is what I believe:
I believe in an Old Earth Creation. That is, the Earth might be millions of years old, along with the rest of the universe. That, in NO way, means I believe in evolution. I believe this universe has a Divine and Personal Creator-God.
The reason why I changed my beliefs stem from reading Genesis chapter 1 and 2 and realizing that sections of the related tales do not make sense to me in this century. I cannot ignore scientific evidence. It would appear that the view is that of a geocentric universe, that is, the Earth is central and the other heavenly bodies were created to complement and enhance life on Earth, such as bringing light, etc.
(Rushing tonight, but I can give a full answer tomorrow when I return.)

Just a thought. How do you reconcile the 7 Day Sabbath if God took thousands of years to create instead of 6 literal days.

 

[SnowBird77]

I just love people who think that what you cannot explain has to be more factual than what you can explain. Just call it faith.

 

[SnowBird77]

Who said that the 7th day Sabbath needs to be reconciled with anything? When the truth of what actually happened depends on the practices one wants to follow we are in dangerous waters. You cannot start with the Sabbath and work backwards.

 

[SnowBird77]

Why is it not sufficient to know that the world was created?

 

[jabechler]

When the literal word of God is questioned, such how long did creation take or is Sabbath the 7 day of the week etc... we cast doubt on the integrity of God and cast a dark shadow on Gods character. Like any rumor the farther you get from when it started the more exagerated the rumor becomes. If we deny or alter the beginning of the story ( Gen 1 ) all that follows will be changed.

I would suggest a new book out " Here We Stand", it outlines the effect of truth when creation takes on progrressive ideas.

 

[moicherie]

When the literal word of God is questioned, such how long did creation take or is Sabbath the 7 day of the week etc... we cast doubt on the integrity of God and cast a dark shadow on Gods character. Like any rumor the farther you get from when it started the more exagerated the rumor becomes. If we deny or alter the beginning of the story ( Gen 1 ) all that follows will be changed.

I would suggest a new book out " Here We Stand", it outlines the effect of truth when creation takes on progrressive ideas.

One should never fear questions, as for the literal word of God that is Jesus not the writings of Moses, inspiration does not equate to dictation.

 

[ChristianCandy]

I believe that either Earth IS billions of years old,
OR
that God created the Earth to look billions of years old.
God can do that.
He can make an old planet instead of a new one.

But in NO WAY do I believe in evolution.
Too many problems that theory can't answer.

Another popular theory is that God created the earth in the beginning and then a disaster happened.
God started all over again with His Spirit moving over the face of the deep of the destroyed plant, void and lifeless & God re-created the life on earth. And God told Adam to "re-plenish" the earth & fill it.

Replenish? Re? To do it over again.

So many things could have happened on this earth that God did not give us an account of.
We will probably never know the answer, but the good thing is, we can always ask Him when we get to heaven.

 

[capnator]

It's the Theory of evolution! not the Fact of evolution.

Everyone has the right to believe what they do and that's cool. Personally I find it hard to comprehend how people want to take a 50/50 stance on the creation/evolution idea because of either a bit of science which is "Theory" with many things that need a lot of explaining/faith to accept or because of Genesis being tales.

Once you decide to ignore one part of the bible how do you decide which bits to believe??? It's make your own religion from there.

If you struggle to believe in the power of God to create the world by speaking in 6 days like it says in Genesis what about... Jesus being born of a virgin, casting out demons, healing, raising people from the dead, rebuking the wheather and saving you from your sins.
What about God being 3 persons in one, or a New Jerusalem coming down to this world after Jesus returns to this earth, destroys the wicked and changes you in a twinkling of an eye.

I dunno, maybe the bible just isnt the book for you?????? There is a lot of crazy stuff in there.

 

[drgibson]

If we claim that the world is "Old" we give validity to the science of evolution.

Has any one here ever heard of Dr. Carl Baugh founder of the Creation Evidence Museum? Google his site.

 

[StormyOne]

If we claim that the world is "Old" we give validity to the science of evolution.

Has any one here ever heard of Dr. Carl Baugh founder of the Creation Evidence Museum? Google his site.

the earth is old.... no claiming about it... reread Gen 1... the earth and water were present (from some other time) when God decided to create life on this planet....

 

[drgibson]

Genesis 1


1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

I don't know how you can claim the formless earth was present before God started the Creation process. No where is there an inference of a time lapse between the creation events.

In the beginning can only mean the Beginning of the Earth, there is no other beginning to reference. Time has no beginning and God has no beginning. Why would God create an object before he needed it? Did the earth need time to cure? Or age? No the earth in total is the age it is. Ok so maybe God created the earth in an “Older” state. Why would God need to create dirt and rocks that appear to be millions of years old knowing full well that man in his desire for knowledge would make a discovery that contradicts the very framework of his creation?

The issue here is can we trust the man made science that claims that the earth is x number of years old. This is the same science that claims that all living things are derived from pond scum.

Carbon dating is a theory that estimates something’s age by how much Carbon-14 is present.

Here is an excerpt about how carbon Dating works and the flaws with this theory.
(This was copied from the Creation Evidence Museum’s web site.)

A less-common form of the carbon atom, carbon-14, is used today by scientists as a method to date once-living organisms. Many people believe that carbon dating disproves the Biblical time scale of history. However, because of the difficulties with current C14 dating techniques, the dates produced have been shown to be faulty.

Carbon-14 is produced in the upper atmosphere by action of cosmic rays. Once the C 14 has been formed, by converting nitrogen-14 into carbon-14, it behaves like ordinary carbon-12, combining with oxygen to give carbon dioxide, and freely cycling through the cells of all plants and animals. Carbon-14 is used for a dating material because once it has been formed, C14 begins to decay radioactively back to nitrogen-14, at a rate of change that can be measured. As soon as an organism dies, the C14 atoms which decay are no longer replaced by new ones through respiration. Consequently, the ratio of C14 to C12 in that once-living organism decreases as time goes on. The problem with the carbon dating method is—scientists can not be sure of what the C14/C12 ratio was when the organism died. Carbon dating assumes that the ratio has remained constant; however, events, such as the industrial revolution, are known to have raised C12 levels. Other possible factors, such as the presence of a water canopy, would have lowered the amount of C14 in the pre-Flood world. Because pre-Flood specimens had so little carbon-14 in them, some might appear to have been decaying for tens of thousands of years. Also, the decay of the earth’s magnetic field would have direct effects on C14 level, again, giving artificially old ages the farther you go back in time. Finally, carbon dating has been shown untrustworthy with some present day aquatic specimens that were concluded to be thousands of years old. For example, the shells of living snails’ were carbon dated and showed that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. Other specimens have been carbon dated more than once, each time producing a different date varying by thousands of years. In overview, we see that the radiocarbon dating method is certainly no embarrassment to the Biblical creationist who believes in a young earth. In fact, when all data, such as the decay of the magnetic field and the canopy, is taken into accord, carbon dating seems to support a young earth.

The earth is only around 6,000 years old to claim otherwise discounts the Creation process. There is no valid reason to claim that the earth is millions of years old except to align God’s word with an inaccurate scientific process.

For more facts based on Scripture and a more accurate scientific process please check out the Creation Evidence Museum web site.

 

[HoneyDew]

It's the Theory of evolution! not the Fact of evolution.

Everyone has the right to believe what they do and that's cool. Personally I find it hard to comprehend how people want to take a 50/50 stance on the creation/evolution idea because of either a bit of science which is "Theory" with many things that need a lot of explaining/faith to accept or because of Genesis being tales.

Once you decide to ignore one part of the bible how do you decide which bits to believe??? It's make your own religion from there.

If you struggle to believe in the power of God to create the world by speaking in 6 days like it says in Genesis what about... Jesus being born of a virgin, casting out demons, healing, raising people from the dead, rebuking the wheather and saving you from your sins.
What about God being 3 persons in one, or a New Jerusalem coming down to this world after Jesus returns to this earth, destroys the wicked and changes you in a twinkling of an eye.

I dunno, maybe the bible just isnt the book for you?????? There is a lot of crazy stuff in there.

Just to clarify: when scientist use the word "theory" they do not use the same way that laypersons such as yourself do.

Don't get so hung up on "religion." That is the root of some of our problems.

 

[HoneyDew]

Genesis 1


1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

I don't know how you can claim the formless earth was present before God started the Creation process. No where is there an inference of a time lapse between the creation events.

In the beginning can only mean the Beginning of the Earth, there is no other beginning to reference. Time has no beginning and God has no beginning. Why would God create an object before he needed it? Did the earth need time to cure? Or age? No the earth in total is the age it is. Ok so maybe God created the earth in an “Older” state. Why would God need to create dirt and rocks that appear to be millions of years old knowing full well that man in his desire for knowledge would make a discovery that contradicts the very framework of his creation?

The earth is only around 6,000 years old to claim otherwise discounts the Creation process. There is no valid reason to claim that the earth is millions of years old except to align God’s word with an inaccurate scientific process.

The earth is NOT only around 6,000. To claim this in NO way discounts the creation process as it is entirely evident that there WAS a creation of this entire universe. Explain then written documentation of the Chinese which dates over 10,000 years, for example.
Don't be so fearful of science and research, it is what allows us to understand mental illness does not mean being possessed by devils. It is what allows us to be immunized against many pathogens that claimed (and still claims) the lives of so many humans.

Let's go along with what you say, namely "In the beginning can only mean the Beginning of the Earth, there is no other beginning to reference."

Are you asserting that the planet Earth, part of the Solar System, part of the entire Universe, was created all special and at a different time than say, Jupiter or other planets in other solar systems?

The age of the Earth and the universe matters not. After all, we have in the Bible where it is said that the Creator is eternal. That covers eons. Millions and millions of years, eh?

 

[drgibson]

First off sorry for the length but it is needed.

The earth is NOT only around 6,000. To claim this in NO way discounts the creation process as it is entirely evident that there WAS a creation of this entire universe. Explain then written documentation of the Chinese which dates over 10,000 years, for example.

Beginning with the archeological landmark event of the fall of Jerusalem (which has now been corrected to 588 B.C., instead of 586-587 B.C.) and counting backwards the prophesied number of years between this event and the division of Solomon's kingdom (390 yrs. + 40 yrs., according to Ezek.4:4-7), brings us to 1018 B.C.
From the end of Solomon's 40-year reign to the start of the Temple in the 4th year of his reign takes us back another 37 years to 1055 B.C.
From the start of Solomon's Temple "in the 480th year" (1 Kings 6:1) back to the Exodus from Egypt (hence 479 years previous) brings us to near 1534 B.C.
From the Exodus out of Egypt to Abraham's entering Canaan from Haran was exactly 430 years to the day (Gen. 12:10/ Exod. 12:40/ Gal. 3:17), thus around 1964 B.C.
Since Abraham entered Canaan at age 75 (Gen. 12:4), he was born approximately 2039 B.C.
From Abraham's birth to Noah's grandson (Shem's son), Arpachshad's birth, 2 years after the Flood started, was 290 years (Gen. 11:11-26), this places the onset of the Flood at around 2331 B.C. [definitely 4,300-4,400 years ago].
The genealogy of Genesis 5:3-32 precludes any gaps due to its tight chronological structure and gives us 1,656 years between Creation and the Flood, thus bringing Creation Week back to near 3987 B.C. or approximately 4000 B.C.
Therefore, the biblical age of the Earth (using Scripture itself as a guide) is 6,000 years.

Don't be so fearful of science and research, it is what allows us to understand mental illness does not mean being possessed by devils. It is what allows us to be immunized against many pathogens that claimed (and still claims) the lives of so many humans.

I embrace science and technloogy when it doesn't contradict the Scriptures. Or when the basis of it's purpose is to discount Scriptures. The the "Old Earth" theory and the "Gap" theory is nothing more than a desperate attempt to harmonize the first chapter of Genesis with the time scale of uniformitarian geology and evolutionary biology by pigeon-holing the geologic ages in an imaginary time-gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. This time-gap is forced upon the text and context of Genesis 1 by an unwarranted manipulation of the Hebrew grammar of its second verse in order to accommodate the evolutionary interpretation of the fossils within the rock record.

Acceptance of the Gap Theory or any other compromise position between the divinely-inspired creation account of Genesis and the fallible evolutionary assumptions of man is really a question of ultimate authority--God's Word or man's word (see Rom. 3:4).

Let's go along with what you say, namely "In the beginning can only mean the Beginning of the Earth, there is no other beginning to reference."

Are you asserting that the planet Earth, part of the Solar System, part of the entire Universe, was created all special and at a different time than say, Jupiter or other planets in other solar systems?

Show me in scripture where the creation of this solar system or universe is covered then we can discuss it. Right now I know of no scientific theory that takes into account the Creation Model in Genesis.

The age of the Earth and the universe matters not. After all, we have in the Bible where it is said that the Creator is eternal. That covers eons. Millions and millions of years, eh?

We are to seek out the Truth lest we are swayed by the winds of doctrine. Anything that is contradictory to the Scriptures is contrary to God. So when we are seeking the Truth we must prove it out through God’s Holy Word. So yes knowing the true age of the earth is important so we do not put science above the Word of God. Science should line up with Scripture not Scripture with science.