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.
No, all you've done is agree with those who agree with you.I have been making rebuttals.
I am just not having them with you, dear sir (Because you are not open to hearing them).
May God bless you.
Here is one theological problem I thought of.
Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mark 13:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
2 Peter 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
None of these verses make any sense if there is a gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, where some speculate that gap consists of millions of years, maybe even billions. Which then brings up another problem. Until God made solar time beginning with creation day 1 and onward, Genesis 1:2 is obviously meaning prior to creation day 1. How can anyone then claim that the earth already existed for millions or billions of solar years prior to creation day 1 when there would not even be solar time yet? And how did the planet get lit up all of these millions and billions of years if there is not even a sun until God creates one during the 6 days of creation?
Getting back to these 3 verses I brought up, where does Genesis have the beginning of creation starting at?
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
How does 2 Peter 3:4 make sense if there is a gap of millions or billions of years since the beginning of the creation, and that in the gap there used to be life on this planet until God wiped them out, so He then started over after this gap? How does that add up to---all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation?
How can it still be the beginning of creation millions or even billions of years later, assuming that is when creation day 1 is meaning? But that would be called recreation not creation, assuming a gap first. None of those verses I submitted call it recreation.
If anyone is closed-minded here, it's you not me. You are closed-minded to the fact that the Bible is correct and that science isn't, in regards to how long the earth has been hanging out in the sky.
The beginning phrase usually determines the meaning of how it will appear later.
How can it still be the beginning of creation millions or even billions of years later,
I agree with you completely on that point. Now apply your own logic to that statement. If Jeremiah used the phrase to show the results of destruction from God's judgement, what must it necessarily mean in Genesis.
You said:How can Satan be a murderer from the beginning if he was created perfect in all his ways?
You said:The restoration that occurred from Gen1:2 onwards was a beginning for man. The word beginning doesn't always have to mean the very first instance of something in relation to all things, only in relation to it's context. In the verses you quoted the context is always in relation to the creation of man but we weren't the first of God's creation. We know there is a whole history of the Lord dealing with angels that we only get the merest glimpse into. Part of the reason we were created and given dominion of the Earth was to resolve the angelic conflict. Angels get to see first hand when they look at us why the Lord is right and Lucifer is wrong.
It has been said the gap can't be there because it doesn't say clearly enough there is one but you can't build arguments from what is not there. Why doesn't it say the angels sang for joy in Genesis 1 when God created everything or even mention their creation? One would think that would be the logical place to put it if the whole first chapter of Genesis is really about the creation of all things.
Even if you disagree with everything else I have said, there is one thing you should understand. I believe there is a gap because of the language used and the use of the same/similar language elsewhere in scripture. It has absolutely nothing to do with the age of the Earth so please don't use that argument as it has no bearing on my thinking. I have no idea how old the Earth is and I don't believe science really knows either. Thanks.
ps. I hope you both don't mind me answering in the single post.
I am glad we can agree on something.
So you're saying you finally recognise 'without form and void' (Gen.1:2) is the result of judgement? It is how Jeremiah uses it and by your own statement you said what follows in scripture repeats the original ergo ....
That's not what Jeremiah said. If Jeremiah wanted to make that fact clear, he would have to say something like, “When the Earth was without form and void before the laying of the foundations in the beginning, God judged that previous world and He will do so again with the Day of the Lord.”
The beginning phrase usually determines the meaning of how it will appear later.
He didn't have to say anything of the sort. Many of us can see what Gen.1:2 means by looking at how the words are used elsewhere in scripture and as the Jeremiah passage uses the exact same terminology it becomes the perfect source of understanding. It is quite clear what Jeremiah is saying in Chapter 4.
v. 22 Describes the state of the nation at the time. Jeremiah has been pleading/warning them to wake up and change their ways or they will come under judgement.
“For My people are foolish,
They have not known Me.
They are silly children,
And they have no understanding.
They are wise to do evil,
But to do good they have no knowledge.”
v. 23 -26a Reveals a state of the earth in which the land is not how Jeremiah has ever known it. It is empty and wasted. He looked up to the heavens and could see no light. (which is exactly as it would be if a catastrophe rendered the atmosphere thick with debris). The mountains and hills shook and trembled. (the mention of hills and mountains shows the earth is not "without form" as if it is some giant gas ball or floating debris yet to be pulled together, it has some structure) He can see no birds, no plants , no cities. (note: he doesn't say there is no planet)
23 I beheld the earth, and indeed it was without form, and void;
And the heavens, they had no light.
24 I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled,
And all the hills moved back and forth.
25 I beheld, and indeed there was no man,
And all the birds of the heavens had fled.
26a I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land was a wilderness,
And all its cities were broken down
v.26b Reveals the reason why the earth is in this state.
26b At the presence of the Lord,
By His fierce anger.
By your own admission you stated:
If the meaning of the later phrase "without form and void" is the result of Gods wrath then by your own words the beginning phrase must mean the same.
Even if you are correct and Jeremiah is witnessing a future event, one between the beginning of the Millennium and the destruction of the nations, the meaning is still exactly the same. The earth is without form and void because the Lord has just judged the nations and everything that follows would be a restoration of the earth so the remaining believers can continue residing on the Earth.
To keep on saying Jeremiah should have said "this" or Genesis should have said "that" is an insult to God and His ability to create a brain that can think for itself for many believers throughout history have seen Genesis 1:2 "without form and void" as the result of God's fierce anger. It is not some new theory as some would try to propose not is it connected to Darwin or evolution. It is what is written.
At the end of the day, The lord will judge who is correct and who isn't. I have said all I have to say on the matter.
Grace and peace to you.
How can Satan be a murderer from the beginning if he was created perfect in all his ways?
Eze.28:15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.
Jn.8:44 He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
Amen!The restoration that occurred from Gen1:2 onwards was a beginning for man. The word beginning doesn't always have to mean the very first instance of something in relation to all things, only in relation to it's context. In the verses you quoted the context is always in relation to the creation of man but we weren't the first of God's creation. We know there is a whole history of the Lord dealing with angels that we only get the merest glimpse into. Part of the reason we were created and given dominion of the Earth was to resolve the angelic conflict. Angels get to see first hand when they look at us why the Lord is right and Lucifer is wrong.
The YEC say that while either ignoring or actively rejecting what the key Hebrew words actually mean. When one gets to that level of understanding, the Bible is very clear that the earth became something that it was not at creation (v.1) and God therefore restored it. Heb 11:3 uses the exact same word rendered "formed/framed/etc" that is found in Gal 6:1 which is correctly translated "restore", and the 2 times it is found in the gospels of the disciples mending their nets.It has been said the gap can't be there because it doesn't say clearly enough there is one
Well said.Even if you disagree with everything else I have said, there is one thing you should understand. I believe there is a gap because of the language used and the use of the same/similar language elsewhere in scripture. It has absolutely nothing to do with the age of the Earth so please don't use that argument as it has no bearing on my thinking. I have no idea how old the Earth is and I don't believe science really knows either. Thanks.
The Gap Theory was only invented to fit into secular Science's view of an Old Earth.
We have to take a step back and ask ourselves, “Why do I believe in this?”
List any personal influencing reasons why it sounds better to you to believe in the belief you hold to.
I would encourage Gap Theory Propnents here to challenge your belief by looking at the reasons here that refute a Gap Theory type belief.
Don't just throw these reasons aside as if they need to be ignored or you need to refute them. Actually consider that they may be true and seek out the truth on both sides on this matter and see what makes more sense in God's Word as a whole.
Likewise with Jeremiah 4:23-28, it is describing a destruction upon the earth because of God's fierce anger, using the same idea as in Genesis 1:2 tohuw va bohuw ("without form, and void").
The gap theory falls apart very quickly because Exodus 20:11 clearly tells us that God created everything in 6 literal days.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is
Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
There is no gap - it’s merely a fantasy.
Who told you that? Its not true at all.
Long before Darwin was born the GAP was understood by Bible scholars, both Jewish and Christian. They simply noted it and did not know what to make of it. For science had not yet shown the reason as to its meaning at that time in history.
It was only later on after secular scientists took their offensive move, that their contemporaries dug in and rediscovered the older teachings concerning the GAP. Interest in the GAP was "renewed." Not invented as you claim.
Many are ignorant of the history of scholars seeing what Genesis 1:2 speaks of as recorded by antecedent scholarship.
Its amazing what many don't know yet.
Men refusing to believe God's Word as written is a different matter than trying to imply a thing isn't written. The Gap idea is written, but it's simply not in direct language. In the Hebrew it is much clearer, because in Genesis 1:2 it says the earth 'became' a waste (tohuw). And in Isaiah 45:18 God said that He did not create the earth 'tohuw' (translated as "in vain" in the KJV). That means the earth in a previous good state went to a ruined condition, not the earth in a gaseous nebula non-created state.
Likewise with Jeremiah 4:23-28, it is describing a destruction upon the earth because of God's fierce anger, using the same idea as in Genesis 1:2 tohuw va bohuw ("without form, and void").
And in Romans 8:18-25, Paul is plainly telling us that God placed His creation in a state of vanity, in bondage to be released from it along with us when we inherit our glorious body (i.e., after Christ's future return). That is pointing to God's creation having been originally NOT in bondage to corruption.
Then the time when Satan actually rebelled against God, the very first sin, has to be understood, because God put parables in His Word that points to that event too, and even shows a time when Satan was perfect in following Him, and was over the nations.
One cannot deny those Scriptures as written unless... they are more interested to sticking to a tradition or agenda of man.
I am not a history buff. I am sure there are things you have been mistaken about over the years (even in history).
What has history got to do with the original languages God ordained for preserving His Word?
The problem we face is ambiguous translations at times. Problem .. it seems.... such wording will lead to commonly held traditional beliefs that are not correct. NOT WANTING CORRECTION .. Refusing it.
As far as being mistaken about past history? Only recently I faced correction. Here is an interesting article:
I always assumed the Swastika was evil. Not according to history.
For Sale: "The Most Costly Drum In the World" - The Wm. S. Hart All Gold Ludwig Snare Drum — Not So Modern Drummer
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?