The Gap Theory...

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

These are great verses for Young Earth Creationism, but I don't see any verses that support the idea of pre-adamic men or a pre-adamic race. There's the sons of God, but those are mentioned just before the flood, not before Adam. What Scriptural evidence can you present? These above are the same verse I'd used to make my case. Perhaps you can pick some of these passages and explain why you think they support your beliefs.

that's all I've got for scripture.

 

[mark kennedy]

that's all I've got for scripture.

There is no indication from Scripture that life existed on earth prior to Creation week. When it begins the earth is covered in water and thick clouds, the Spirit is hovering over the deep. We know that the angels were created before creation week because on day three according to Job 38, the morning stars (angels) celebrated. I'm not entirely sure how long the rebellion of Satan and his angels has been going on but it definitely predates the creation of life on earth.

By the way, when Genesis describes the 'Serpent', it's really more of a proper name.

He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. (Rev. 20:2)
​

If the earth and the universe were actually very old it would explain radiometric dating giving us old ages for fossils. What they are mineralized with is very old, that doesn't mean the fossil is. What's more Gap theory is a far more elaborate allegorizing of Genesis 1 then a gap between the first and second verse. Huge Ross does an elaborate and absurd rationalization of the days of creation. We haven't been talking about Gap Theory much at all, which I personally appreciate since it's a pointless rationalization as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

...

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

It would be nice if I could argue well from the scriptures, but others can do it much better than I am able .. this video begins at 15.00...

 

[GenemZ]

Genesis 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 And 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.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

I have changed my mind about this again. I think the text has greater meaning. The earth was an abyss - formless and empty, and there was water. The deep is the abyss.
I am no longer accepting of the Gap Theory.

The English words you used do not represent the Hebrew text accurately. On the basis of what you quoted I would have to agree... I could not even begin to understand the GAP either. It would make no sense that way.

Fact is.. When Jeremiah (4:23) was prophesying his warning-threat of their destruction to the rebellious Jews of his generation, he used the same Hebrew words from Genesis 1:2. Why? Because, Genesis 1:2 was referring to God's wrath and JUDGEMENT. And, the Jews knowing Hebrew, got the picture!

I looked [to] the land, and lo, laid waste and void, And unto the heavens, and their light is not.​

Jeremiah spoke the same combined words "tohu wabohu" as found in Genesis 1:2. It means utter havoc and ruin! Not the dainty sounding "without form and void" that we find in too many misleading English translations.

We are being denied the truth. For, how could such a dainty meaning be used by Jeremiah to threaten and warn the Jews with?

And it was not simply speaking of water. It was raging waters. Waters that were the result of the Holy Spirit hovering over what had been a giant ice pack. For, when there was no light on earth (after the flood of the previous earth) it froze solid! For the Hebrew word used to describe the Holy Spirit's action over the waters as found in Genesis one, is the Hebrew word used for describing what a mother hen does when she sits on and warms her eggs.

God gave us the Hebrew. Satan and men give us some poor translations. What misleads and deceives.

The Jews spoke Hebrew and quickly understood the ominous warning coming from Jeremiah's mouth! That rebellious Israel was to be laid waste and ruined by God just like God had done to the previous prehistoric creation (Gen 1:2). They understood. Many today fail to.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

The English words you used do not represent the Hebrew text accurately. On the basis of what you quoted I would have to agree... I could not even begin to understand the GAP either. It would make no sense that way.

Fact is.. When Jeremiah (4:23) was prophesying his warning-threat of their destruction to the rebellious Jews of his generation, he used the same Hebrew words from Genesis 1:2. Why? Because, Genesis 1:2 was referring to God's wrath and JUDGEMENT. And, the Jews knowing Hebrew, got the picture!

I looked [to] the land, and lo, laid waste and void, And unto the heavens, and their light is not.​

Jeremiah spoke the same combined words "tohu wabohu" as found in Genesis 1:2. It means utter havoc and ruin! Not the dainty sounding "without form and void" that we find in too many misleading English translations.

We are being denied the truth. For, how could such a dainty meaning be used by Jeremiah to threaten and warn the Jews with?

And it was not simply speaking of water. It was raging waters. Waters that were the result of the Holy Spirit hovering over what had been a giant ice pack. For, when there was no light on earth (after the flood of the previous earth) it froze solid! For the Hebrew word used to describe the Holy Spirit's action over the waters as found in Genesis one, is the Hebrew word used for describing what a mother hen does when she sits on and warms her eggs.

God gave us the Hebrew. Satan and men give us some poor translations. What misleads and deceives.

The Jews spoke Hebrew and quickly understood the ominous warning coming from Jeremiah's mouth! That rebellious Israel was to be laid waste and ruined by God just like God had done to the previous prehistoric creation (Gen 1:2). They understood. Many today fail to.

The King James is a reliable translation of the Hebrew.

I differ with those who believe in a pre-Adamic civilization. I don't believe there were any men on the earth, prior to Genesis 1.1 and 1.2. If there were men, then the bible would have something to say about it. However, there were sons of God, and there was Lucifer - the top dog in heaven.
I saw an interesting presentation, about the inverted five-point star, and why it is inverted - it is because at one time it was the right way up: at the top of the star was Lucifer (the leader of music and worship, and the top cherub). On the lower two star points was Michael and Gabriel (arch-angels) and the other two lower points were two other arch-angels - Raphael and another.

: previous prehistoric creation,
And it was not simply speaking of water. It was raging waters. Waters that were the result of the Holy Spirit hovering over what had been a giant ice pack. For, when there was no light on earth (after the flood of the previous earth) it froze solid! For the Hebrew word used to describe the Holy Spirit's action over the waters as found in Genesis one, is the Hebrew word used for describing what a mother hen does when she sits on and warms her eggs.

The great flood was a judgement on the previous prehistoric creation. There might have been another flood at the time of Noah - but that flood imo. was more local to the mid-east, and the purpose was to wipe-out mankind, which had been corrupted by fallen-angel DNA.

The fallen DNA was passed on however, through the wives of Noah's sons. That's why, in the film Noah, Noah wraps a snake skin around the arm, and it glows for a moment - that symbolizes the passing of the fallen or serpent DNA, past the flood of Noah.
I agree that the flood waters of the great flood froze solid - but that imo. is another flood, a pre-historic flood, and a judgement against the fall of Lucifer

- whatever happened, must have been dramatic, for God to have destroyed the entire earth, with no life remaining - that's what I believe - that the fossils of sea-shells at the tops of mountains, and the coal etc. is the evidence for the great flood. Evidence for the flood of Noah, has been unearthed in ancient Iraq.

The serpent DNA is passed imo. along the male line. That is why it is so important to establish some Christian fundamentals - the virgin birth. The serpent DNA could not be eliminated, as the sons of God interbred with women after the flood of Noah. And (controversial as it is) I believe that Eve had relations with 'the Nachash'.
Eve gave birth to twins - Cain and Abel - one was serpent seed, the other from Adam, and the twain mixed through history.
I have come to believe that Adam and Eve were black people, and that the Father is in the form of a black man - with skin colour of Jasper and Carnelian - reddish brown - hair is either black or white, as an Afro. (Daniel and Revelation).
Jesus also said that they had not seen the father's form - so the father has a form, and Isaiah also saw the Father in heaven, but didn't describe him much.

 

[GenemZ]

The King James is a reliable translation of the Hebrew.

I differ with those who believe in a pre-Adamic civilization. I don't believe there were any men on the earth, prior to Genesis 1.1 and 1.2. If there were men, then the bible would have something to say about it.

The Bible does say about it. And, interestingly.. it uses only a generic form of man to describe the 'humanoid' that lived in the end of the prehistoric creation. Jeremiah when he shouts out the words found in Gen 1:2 as his prophesy of the upcoming judgment and destruction by God of the rebellious Jews (who went in captivity to Nebuchadnezzar) ... Jeremiah spoke of a humanoid that was utterly wiped out. Then, Jeremiah needs to finish by saying that with Israel in their case some will survive. Whoever these 'humanoids' were? They were utterly destroyed and ended.

Prophets not only predicted the future. But, could go back into times before they lived. Proof? Moses! Moses takes us all back in time to when the planet's creation of this world took place! Moses was taken back in time! Prophets not only saw the future. Like God they could enter into any realm of time if the Spirit so desired!

Jeremiah 4 holds the key to seeing the utter destruction of the prehistoric man.

While prophesying about rebellious Judah...

22 “My people are fools;
they do not know me.
They are senseless children;
they have no understanding.
They are skilled in doing evil;
they know not how to do good.”​

Jeremiah then transports them to a previous judgment that was given by God to show them to what extent the power of God has to ruin and destroy whom He judges!

23 I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone. (Genesis 1:2!!!!!!!!)
24 I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
25 I looked, and there were no people; (humanoid - Hebrew uses only generic term for man)
every bird in the sky had flown away.
26 I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger.​

There were no people (humanoids) surviving! Extinct! Massive cataclysmic event took place placing the planet in chaotic ruin and having an eerie sense of emptiness about it.

God through Jeremiah then had to qualify what Jeremiah just said, to tell them that with the Jews that God will not cause all of them to cease to exist!

27 This is what the Lord says:

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely.​

Jeremiah had to say that for also the sake of the angels who were wondering if this was to be another extinction brought on by the judgment of God. They needed to know that the Jews would not be like the prehistoric humanoids that were totally wiped out. That some Jews will remain alive. And, some did. Psalm 119 speaks of the survivors death march to Chaldea where they went into slavery for 70 years.

The Bible is not impossible to understand... once we get understanding.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

The Bible does say about it. And, interestingly.. it uses only a generic form of man to describe the 'humanoid' that lived in the end of the prehistoric creation. Jeremiah when he shouts out the words found in Gen 1:2 as his prophesy of the upcoming judgment and destruction by God of the rebellious Jews (who went in captivity to Nebuchadnezzar) ... Jeremiah spoke of a humanoid that was utterly wiped out. Then, Jeremiah needs to finish by saying that with Israel in their case some will survive. Whoever these 'humanoids' were? They were utterly destroyed and ended.

Prophets not only predicted the future. But, could go back into times before they lived. Proof? Moses! Moses takes us all back in time to when the planet's creation of this world took place! Moses was taken back in time! Prophets not only saw the future. Like God they could enter into any realm of time if the Spirit so desired!

Jeremiah 4 holds the key to seeing the utter destruction of the prehistoric man.

While prophesying about rebellious Judah...

22 “My people are fools;
they do not know me.
They are senseless children;
they have no understanding.
They are skilled in doing evil;
they know not how to do good.”​

Jeremiah then transports them to a previous judgment that was given by God to show them to what extent the power of God has to ruin and destroy whom He judges!

23 I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone. (Genesis 1:2!!!!!!!!)
24 I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
25 I looked, and there were no people; (humanoid - Hebrew uses only generic term for man)
every bird in the sky had flown away.
26 I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger.​

There were no people (humanoids) surviving! Extinct! Massive cataclysmic event took place placing the planet in chaotic ruin and having an eerie sense of emptiness about it.

God through Jeremiah then had to qualify what Jeremiah just said, to tell them that with the Jews that God will not cause all of them to cease to exist!

27 This is what the Lord says:

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely.​

Jeremiah had to say that for also the sake of the angels who were wondering if this was to be another extinction brought on by the judgment of God. They needed to know that the Jews would not be like the prehistoric humanoids that were totally wiped out. That some Jews will remain alive. And, some did. Psalm 119 speaks of the survivors death march to Chaldea where they went into slavery for 70 years.

The Bible is not impossible to understand... once we get understanding.

I thought you didn't accept the gap theory? Some people say that the pre-Adamic race were the Neanderthals - that they were a different species and not just another race of man. They say that Neanderthal DNA survives in modern humans.
If Neanderthals did exist before the great flood - then they would have been wiped out, and there could not have been many of them, as they would show up in the fossil record.
'allegedly Dave' on YouTube suggests that the Neanderthals were created by angles (I don't know if I go along with that) - and that Cain went out into the wilderness and married a Neanderthal, and built a city, as the Neanderthals were too primitive to build cities.
YECs say that Neanderthals are just another race of men. But there seems to be differences in the DNA? 'allegedly Dave' says that Adam was created to be immortal, but having relations with Eve produced a state of mortality - as the creative/life force went out from Adam, as part of the reproductive act.
From my studies, I have concluded that the Australopithecus were extinct apes and nothing more. But the shape of the Neanderthal skull is very different from modern human - even though the brain capacity was larger.

 

[GenemZ]

I thought you didn't accept the gap theory? Some people say that the pre-Adamic race were the Neanderthals - that they were a different species and not just another race of man. They say that Neanderthal DNA survives in modern humans.
If Neanderthals did exist before the great flood - then they would have been wiped out, and there could not have been many of them, as they would show up in the fossil record.
'allegedly Dave' on YouTube suggests that the Neanderthals were created by angles (I don't know if I go along with that) - and that Cain went out into the wilderness and married a Neanderthal, and built a city, as the Neanderthals were too primitive to build cities.
YECs say that Neanderthals are just another race of men. But there seems to be differences in the DNA? 'allegedly Dave' says that Adam was created to be immortal, but having relations with Eve produced a state of mortality - as the creative/life force went out from Adam, as part of the reproductive act.
From my studies, I have concluded that the Australopithecus were extinct apes and nothing more. But the shape of the Neanderthal skull is very different from modern human - even though the brain capacity was larger.

Jeremiah tells us what it was.

Man is a type in creation. In this creation God created man's soul in his image. In the prehistoric creation, man was the highest form of animal intelligence-wise. Much smarter than a monkey.. But, he was not created with a soul having everlasting life. That is why God was able to wipe them out forever.

If God had created the Neanderthals with a soul designed for everlasting life? Jesus would have had to die on a Cross just for them,,, and have become Neanderthal to do so.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

Jeremiah tells us what it was.

Man is a type in creation. In this creation God created man's soul in his image. In the prehistoric creation, man was the highest form of animal intelligence-wise. Much smarter than a monkey.. But, he was not created with a soul having everlasting life. That is why God was able to wipe them out forever.

If God had created the Neanderthals with a soul designed for everlasting life? Jesus would have had to die on a Cross just for them,,, and have become Neanderthal to do so.

Hugh Ross says that Neanderthals and Homo Eretcus were not human in any way..

at odds with the young-earthers who say they were another human race. In my view, they were killed off by humans - they were not a pre-adamic race, and Cain did not marry them. I don't believe in a pre-adamic race.

 

[GenemZ]

Hugh Ross says that Neanderthals and Homo Eretcus were not human in any way..

Jeremiah classified them (in the Hebrew) as humanoid. "A type." Not created in God's image, but the highest in the order of intelligence amongst the prehistoric world. Could make tools, etc..
Did Hugh Ross address Jeremiah 4?


23 I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone. (Genesis 1:2!)
24 I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
25 I looked, and there were no people; (whatever these humanoids were, they ceased to exist!)
every bird in the sky had flown away.
26 I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger.


Hear about what Harold Smithson thinks it is?

Hear about what Charlie Thille thinks it is?

But? Did you... hear about what Jeremiah had to say?

Jeremiah 4:25 used only a generic term for people. All of them went extinct through a catastrophic judgment by God. An event that was described in Genesis 1:2... "Toho wabohu" is used twice in the Bible. First time it was Genesis 1:2. The other was Jeremiah 4:23!

23 I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone. "


Its there!

I do not care what kind of speculation some men may come up with when the answer has been given by God's Word.

Someone is going to have to do it.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

...

 

[GenemZ]

Jeremiah is supporting the gap-theory, as he uses the same words formless and empty, as in Genesis.

Formless and empty ...is so mild sounding to our thinking.

We can read it and move on, and not question anything.

But, what if it (more accurately) read?

And the earth was a chaotic and disarrayed, submerged in an eerie sense of emptiness? ​

Like the scene of Tokyo in the original Godzilla, as the monster was leaving with a the smoldering ruined city in ruins?

The Hebrew word translated empty holds a meaning of an eerie loneliness about it. Like entering a ghost town during a dismal time of year.

Genesis 1:2 was not a pretty picture. Its exactly why Jeremiah threatened the apostate rebellious Jews with that passage! It meant utter ruin and psychotic lonliness.

I know you don't like it when we listen to the theories of men - but for me, I find it useful to get a broad range of opinions - especially from devout Christians.

May I suggest an excellent classic exegetical scholarly work?

The Invisible War - Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse. https://www.amazon.com/Invisible-War-Donald-Grey-Barnhouse/dp/031020481X

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

Formless and empty ...is so mild sounding to our thinking.

May I suggest an excellent classic exegetical scholarly work?

The Invisible War - Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse. https://www.amazon.com/Invisible-War-Donald-Grey-Barnhouse/dp/031020481X

I read that book a long time ago, but no longer have it.
I was reading various critiques on Hugh Ross - some saying that he is a heretic. I think he is totally wrong on cosmology (even if he does have a PhD in it). I accept the Genesis cosmology very literally.
The thing is, I think Hugh might be right about Homo erectus and Neanderthals - that they are not human - especially Homo erectus, but also Neanderthals - that they didn't wear clothes and made no tools other than rock shards. They might have been covered in fur.
As I don't accept evolution, then they must have been created - but when? - I don't really know, but I think it might be possible that Neanderthals/erectus existed at the same time as man - and were killed off by men, as they competed with men, but humans had weapons, like spears and there is some evidence that they had guns in ancient times - there is a Neanderthal skull with a bullet hole in it:

neanderthal with bullet hole - Google Search

 

[GenemZ]

I read that book a long time ago, but no longer have it.
I was reading various critiques on Hugh Ross - some saying that he is a heretic. I think he is totally wrong on cosmology (even if he does have a PhD in it). I accept the Genesis cosmology very literally.
The thing is, I think Hugh might be right about Homo erectus and Neanderthals - that they are not human - especially Homo erectus, but also Neanderthals - that they didn't wear clothes and made no tools other than rock shards. They might have been covered in fur.
As I don't accept evolution, then they must have been created - but when? - I don't really know, but I think it might be possible that Neanderthals/erectus existed at the same time as man - and were killed off by men, as they competed with men, but humans had weapons, like spears and there is some evidence that they had guns in ancient times - there is a Neanderthal skull with a bullet hole in it:

neanderthal with bullet hole - Google Search

PhD means nothing in itself. When they are not led of the Spirit they only make things more complex than need be, and wander us off in the toolies.

BTW... I learned of the Hebrew meaning of "people" (being a generic Hebrew form for "man") from professor Stan Ashby. Professor Ashby was retired when I knew him. He had dedicated his time to teaching ancient languages at a Bible college I attended back in the late 70's - early 80's. Stan at one time was at Harvard. He insisted I call him "Stan" and refrain from the "professor" tag. He disliked the over intellectualized Christianity .... though he was never afraid to get complex himself. His exegesis was helpful at times.

Hugh Ross ... the little I see online... is someone who over intellectualizes IMHO. There are way too many richly satisfying important truths to be found in the Bible to be learned, than to get bogged down chasing such intellectualized teachings... Its to much speculation as far as I am concerned.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

PhD means nothing in itself. When they are not led of the Spirit they only make things more complex than need be, and wander us off in the toolies.

Hugh Ross ... the little I see online... is someone who over intellectualizes IMHO. There are way too many richly satisfying important truths to be found in the Bible to be learned, than to get bogged down chasing such intellectualized teachings... Its to much speculation as far as I am concerned.

I think that Hugh Ross, despite having a PhD in astronomy, is totally wrong about astronomy and cosmology. If we go back to Genesis 1, we have God explaining it to us, in a way that we can understand - there being water above and below the earth, a solid firmament holding in the atmosphere - and water in outer space, not a vacuum - which would actually suck away the atmosphere, it that was true. The stars are within the firmament - and they are small and not far away:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

the gap is here..

2 And the earth was (became) 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.

the ruined disc of the earth is surrounded by water - above and below..

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

this is not sunlight or moonlight - as those bodies had not yet been created..

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

this has deeper meaning - the separation of the light from the darkness.. it is framed in a way that we can understand..

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

there is night and day now, but still it is not sunlight or moonlight, so that day does not have to be 24 hours, yet..

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

there is a space placed between the waters..

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.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

the dry land was already there (it appeared) - from under the waters - the waters recede and the disc of the earth appears above the water..

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

the third day brings forth vegetation, but that day could last 100 years, as the sun and moon had not been created yet, this would give time for the trees to reach maturity.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

the luminaries are made on the fourth day, and they are in the firmament - not outside it in an endless vacuum, as Hugh would have us believe. Hugh claims to believe in the bible, and tries to shoe-horn in science to fit the bible, with such matters as the genealogy of mankind, and the flood and the location of the garden of Eden, yet he does not believe the fundamentals of the bible - that the earth does not move, space isn't a vacuum etc.
I am not a fundamentalist, but I do think that God sat down with someone and wrote Genesis 1, and it is reliable and true. I don't think anyone could know the genealogy of mankind - and the geneticists say that mankind originates from one woman (mitochondrial Eve) 50,000 years ago, in East Africa - but instead of just accepting that, Hugh tries to work it, so that the genealogy in the bible works out to 50K years (it doesn't) - and work it, that Eden was in Iraq and not Africa - just because Genesis says it was in Iraq.
Kent Hovind calls Hugh a heretic - he is not a heretic, he is just wrong.
However, regarding the hominids - there is evidence that Neanderthals were a separate species to humans, and yet they interbred. This would mean that the creation of man was not special, if Neanderthals were already there, or also created on the sixth day. If we have Neanderthal and angel blood mixed in with the original human DNA - then being made in the image of God, is something else - the final condition of man, born-again and in heaven. The image of God is a potential, in my view.
The Neanderthals seem to date to the same time as man - homo-erectus was earlier, and the Australopithecus earlier.
To Hugh's credit - he has tried to come up with a solution to the science on the hominids - the young-earthers avoid the science and claim that Neanderthal and homo-erectus were another race of man - I don't believe that - although I do agree that 'Lucy' was an extinct ape, and no evolution scenario.
As far as I can tell, the date for the Neanderthal is based on evolutionist theory, and not hard-evidence. If Genesis 1 is reliable, then nothing survived the great flood, and the six days are a re-creation - the age of mankind would be 50K years, and so the Neanderthal would have to be of the same age.
Homo-erectus and the Australopithecus would have been from the previous age - the age of the dinosaurs - they were not created in the image of God - they were basically animals.

 

[GenemZ]

I think that Hugh Ross, despite having a PhD in astronomy, is totally wrong about astronomy and cosmology. If we go back to Genesis 1, we have God explaining it to us, in a way that we can understand - there being water above and below the earth, a solid firmament holding in the atmosphere - and water in outer space, not a vacuum - which would actually suck away the atmosphere, it that was true. The stars are within the firmament - and they are small and not far away:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

the gap is here..

2 And the earth was (became) 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.

the ruined disc of the earth is surrounded by water - above and below..

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

this is not sunlight or moonlight - as those bodies had not yet been created..

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

this has deeper meaning - the separation of the light from the darkness.. it is framed in a way that we can understand..

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

there is night and day now, but still it is not sunlight or moonlight, so that day does not have to be 24 hours, yet..

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

there is a space placed between the waters..

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.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

the dry land was already there (it appeared) - from under the waters - the waters recede and the disc of the earth appears above the water..

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

the third day brings forth vegetation, but that day could last 100 years, as the sun and moon had not been created yet, this would give time for the trees to reach maturity.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

the luminaries are made on the fourth day, and they are in the firmament - not outside it in an endless vacuum, as Hugh would have us believe. Hugh claims to believe in the bible, and tries to shoe-horn in science to fit the bible, with such matters as the genealogy of mankind, and the flood and the location of the garden of Eden, yet he does not believe the fundamentals of the bible - that the earth does not move, space isn't a vacuum etc.
I am not a fundamentalist, but I do think that God sat down with someone and wrote Genesis 1, and it is reliable and true. I don't think anyone could know the genealogy of mankind - and the geneticists say that mankind originates from one woman (mitochondrial Eve) 50,000 years ago, in East Africa - but instead of just accepting that, Hugh tries to work it, so that the genealogy in the bible works out to 50K years (it doesn't) - and work it, that Eden was in Iraq and not Africa - just because Genesis says it was in Iraq.
Kent Hovind calls Hugh a heretic - he is not a heretic, he is just wrong.
However, regarding the hominids - there is evidence that Neanderthals were a separate species to humans, and yet they interbred. This would mean that the creation of man was not special, if Neanderthals were already there, or also created on the sixth day. If we have Neanderthal and angel blood mixed in with the original human DNA - then being made in the image of God, is something else - the final condition of man, born-again and in heaven. The image of God is a potential, in my view.
The Neanderthals seem to date to the same time as man - homo-erectus was earlier, and the Australopithecus earlier.
To Hugh's credit - he has tried to come up with a solution to the science on the hominids - the young-earthers avoid the science and claim that Neanderthal and homo-erectus were another race of man - I don't believe that - although I do agree that 'Lucy' was an extinct ape, and no evolution scenario.
As far as I can tell, the date for the Neanderthal is based on evolutionist theory, and not hard-evidence. If Genesis 1 is reliable, then nothing survived the great flood, and the six days are a re-creation - the age of mankind would be 50K years, and so the Neanderthal would have to be of the same age.
Homo-erectus and the Australopithecus would have been from the previous age - the age of the dinosaurs - they were not created in the image of God - they were basically animals.

Too much to unravel at once. We all need to find a competent teacher(s) who knows how to exegete the Scriptures with integrity. Too much to unravel in what you said at once. Though I would attempt to answer only bits of what you say. Right now you are mentally flailing on certain points because too many truths need yet to be learned as to become stabilized.

If you want to take one "peace" at a time? Then I would venture in that manner.

Here's one. God did not create the sun, moon, and stars after what we read in Genesis 1:2. He created them (bara) "in the beginning."

The Hebrew says that what God had already created (sun, moon, and stars) in the beginning. It also says that he "made" (asah) them at that point to bear light. They were not created (bara) on the fourth day.

They had been already created "in the beginning." God simply threw a divine switch and the lights he had prepared turned on. First three days God himself supplied the light just as he had done in the prehistoric creation. To the angels watching is was the normal routine as to how the prehistoric world worked...

In Genesis One we are minus one factor. "Lucifer " was no longer with his light bearing abilities was bringing in the mornings (Isaiah 14:12) as Lucifer had done for the prehistoric creation,,,, as well as the "morning star angels" supplying their lights as well. God knocked these angels off their perch (so to speak) by replacing them with light bearing "rocks." "How special and important are you now?"

Even decent English translations state that God "made"(not created) the sun, moon, and stars to bear light. It never says that he then created them at that point. The sun, moon , and stars were like Christmas lights awaiting the electric switch that God saved for the right time when they would be needed.

For God knew that Lucifer (light bearer) and his "morning stars" would become proud because of their unique abilities and become arrogantly rebellious. It was a real shock to Satan and his angels when they saw themselves being replaced by "glowing rocks in space." There they were thinking how much more superior they were to the regular angels...and God replaced them with inanimate glowing orbs of light.

The Lord created the firefly as a tiny reminder to the angels as to how important they were in the scheme of things in creation. Yes... the Lord has a great sense of humor.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

Too much to unravel at once. We all need to find a competent teacher(s) who knows how to exegete the Scriptures with integrity. Too much to unravel in what you said at once. Though I would attempt to answer only bits of what you say.

The Hebrew says that what God had already created (sun, moon, and stars) in the beginning. It also says that he "made" (asah) them at that point to bear light. They were not created (bara) on the fourth day.

The Lord created the firefly as a tiny reminder to the angels as to how important they were in the scheme of things in creation. Yes... the Lord has a great sense of humor.

I was thinking that 'made' was 'create' - perhaps not. I think there are two truths going on at the same time. There is not enough to unravel the mysteries of everything, but there is information framed in a way that we can understand. The Greek Gnostics tried to work out the mysteries of the universe, but ended up creating a religion, based on speculation (the demiurge, aeons, archons etc).
It would make sense, thinking in the 'first level' of the text - that the sun, moon etc were there already.

 

[GenemZ]

I was thinking that 'made' was 'create' - perhaps not. I think there are two truths going on at the same time. There is not enough to unravel the mysteries of everything, but there is information framed in a way that we can understand. The Greek Gnostics tried to work out the mysteries of the universe, but ended up creating a religion, based on speculation (the demiurge, aeons, archons etc).
It would make sense, thinking in the 'first level' of the text - that the sun, moon etc were there already.

Paul (and John) copped some of the Greek terms used used by the Gnostics, and showed how they were fulfilled only by the power of God's grace when walking in accurate understanding of God's Word.

Paul copped the Greek word "wurtoose" (virtue) from the stoics and revealed the same truths about God's provision of the power of God's grace was the only means to fulfilling such a desire for attainment.

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

Paul (and John) copped some of the Greek terms used used by the Gnostics, and showed how they were fulfilled only by the power of God's grace when walking in accurate understanding of God's Word.

I was thinking about the words create and make/made. I checked through Genesis 1 again, and in the beginning Elohim created the heaven and earth. But later, it says - let the waters bring forth (whales, birds and living creatures) and let the earth bring forth: the living creature - cattle and creeping thing, according to their kind, and beast of the earth; according to his kind. I double checked again, and beast of the earth (KJV) is
another separate kind to the living creature, but it is also brought forth from the earth.

What seems to be, is that the water and the earth have form-making potential in themselves - it is not a direct creation of God it seems, but as if the generation of kinds is sourced from the water and earth somehow, according to creative templates or kinds.
What clarifies, of what the beast of the earth is, is provided later in the text, when it says that the living creature eats vegetation, and as I already established that the beast of the earth was another kind, separate from the living creature - it is anything that eats other creatures - all carnivores, inc. spiders, snakes etc.

There is a mystery that I cannot solve. The letters of Paul mention principalities of darkness and archons (demons). Where did they originate? The Gnostics believed that the archons originated from the demiurge - a lesser creator-god. It's a very complicated set of beliefs - and I do not accept any of it.
There is no such thing as the demiurge. God created heaven and earth. So where did the archons come from? I don't accept the orthodox view - that they are the spirits of the Nephalim - that is not a convincing argument to me. I don't know where they came from, but the water and the earth had form-making potential, rather than creative potential. Perhaps some other, had similar form-making potential, which generated the archons. Just speculation, as I do not know the answer.
Also, it says - let us make man in our image - different from the formation of the animals from water and earth.