created in 6 days question

[Viligant_Warrior]

And what if Genesis is not historical?But in fact,conveying truth in another way. No one can really be sure ,except dogmatically or if that is what they have been taught and refuse to even, God forbid, consider something else.

This is where the study of the original languages is absolutely necessary for a well-grounded understanding. Not that everyone has to study Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, but knowing good trustworthy sources that can explain the nuances of the languages is vital. And here is why ...

The context, syntax, and tense of the original Hebrew forbids any but a literal, factual, historical interpretation. "And there was evening, and there was morning, one day" means exactly what it says. It cannot be made, by scholarship and certainly not by wishful thinking, to say anything else. God created the universe and everything in it in six literal, 24-hour days. Genesis 1 can't be made to say anything else.

In my opinion to many people ,not necessarily you, think the more they claim to know the closer to God and better than others they are. An insecurity sickness I think ,or something.It is Good to instruct someone in the lord.The bible says in meekness oppose those who are off the path, considering yourself. Gentleness,tender hearted, patient,etc, all fruits of the Spirit in us.

This reads as incredibly reasonable thought -- until one looks behind the kind words to understand what you actually said. You just did, in these few sentences, the exact same thing you accuse everyone else of doing -- claiming to be closer to God than others. Your words also speak to an espousal of love above all else -- meaning that you are willing to compromise truth in order to avoid conflict, and God forbid, think others could be wrong, or worse, in sin.

What is extremely imiportant to grasp is that Christ is definitely about love. He is also about righteousness, and He forsakes neither one for the other. We cannot hope to live righteously, but as we wear Christ's righteousness, we must act in accordance with His love for us, and He commanded us, as the church, to preach His truth. That demands honestly, and it demands adherence to the foundation of that truth, God's word.

Christ never equivocated. He never gave any indication there was room for debate about His Living Word. You undermine that word, you undermine your faith, the expectation that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

While you cling to the name of Christ, you deny the power of Christ, by denying His ability to speak everything into existence. The power of God is to create a universe in six days. You deny that power, you deny Him, and probably without even realizing it.

I desperately want you to understand, I am not debasing you. I see you as a loving brother in Christ who wants all to see Him in you. Unfortunately, you fog the glass by watering down Jesus. I simply want you to see the lengths to which compromise has taken you, the distance it puts between you and Him.

 

[weakness]

This is where the study of the original languages is absolutely necessary for a well-grounded understanding. Not that everyone has to study Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, but knowing good trustworthy sources that can explain the nuances of the languages is vital. And here is why ...

The context, syntax, and tense of the original Hebrew forbids any but a literal, factual, historical interpretation. "And there was evening, and there was morning, one day" means exactly what it says. It cannot be made, by scholarship and certainly not by wishful thinking, to say anything else. God created the universe and everything in it in six literal, 24-hour days. Genesis 1 can't be made to say anything else.

This reads as incredibly reasonable thought -- until one looks behind the kind words to understand what you actually said. You just did, in these few sentences, the exact same thing you accuse everyone else of doing -- claiming to be closer to God than others. Your words also speak to an espousal of love above all else -- meaning that you are willing to compromise truth in order to avoid conflict, and God forbid, think others could be wrong, or worse, in sin.

What is extremely imiportant to grasp is that Christ is definitely about love. He is also about righteousness, and He forsakes neither one for the other. We cannot hope to live righteously, but as we wear Christ's righteousness, we must act in accordance with His love for us, and He commanded us, as the church, to preach His truth. That demands honestly, and it demands adherence to the foundation of that truth, God's word.

Christ never equivocated. He never gave any indication there was room for debate about His Living Word. You undermine that word, you undermine your faith, the expectation that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

While you cling to the name of Christ, you deny the power of Christ, by denying His ability to speak everything into existence. The power of God is to create a universe in six days. You deny that power, you deny Him, and probably without even realizing it.

I desperately want you to understand, I am not debasing you. I see you as a loving brother in Christ who wants all to see Him in you. Unfortunately, you fog the glass by watering down Jesus. I simply want you to see the lengths to which compromise has taken you, the distance it puts between you and Him.[/QUOTE/ What if? I think is what I saidI think we should try and get the stiff out of our necks a little. I Know that there is more to Genesis than an eternal argument . I also said to tin that it wasn't bad to disagree and have insight or exhortation. And I think I said my point which was show sum humility in what we Know or think we knowI hope I am guilty of that I don't think I degraded any one or cut them off, or disregarded anything they said. Maybe I did and am mistaken I understood what was said and said that and had an appreciation for most of it, I think, at least thats how I felt. I was trying to treat people as the lord 's not mine and saw some truth in what was said but not all of it, not even mine. The heart is deceitfully wicked who can know it. I don't really know any hebrew or Greek but sometimes enjoy discussions here ,sometimes not. I have been around a lot of different types of "scholars" ,and that sometimes , at least half, doesn't mean much . Now How do you know what I deny? what god has done and is to me I don't think I have said enough for you to Know what I "compromise " or don't.Did you read the post I just wrote about God ,Jesus, speaking every thing into being? Check it out . That what I beleive ,the logos Uttered it into physical reality. Go find that will you. See here you are crossing the line because of the falsehood of your words Post 174 and if you have read it You are ...well I'lll leave that alone. I don't think I forsook anybody in this , maybe you do, apparently myself any way read that post and tell me I deny Gods speaking thing into existence . I'll expect a reply!!! thanks

 

[angelsonthemove4u]

Although God is supernatural and all things are possible with Him, The 7 days of God`s creation are made up of 7 of God`s days and one of God`s days is as a thousand years to man, so be not ignorant of this, God`s words not mine : 2nd Peter chapter 3 verse 8 will document the reality of The world and ours creation timetable, 7000 years allows for a natural progression, not a flash in the pan creation....

 

[Jeff_56]

probably a few have answered already. RoboOp did in his thread in BibleStudy section (heresy).

the pope has never agreed with Scripture, nor with God, nor with Jesus. never. no, not ever.

Can someone answer, why the pope himself is announcing that genesis is not accurate and that everything wasn't created in 6 days as per genesis with his quote about something to the effect of are we to believe that god was a magician and waved his magic wand around.

i'm certainly not catholic, but i truly find this shocking.

thank you

God bless

 

[Tintin]

Although God is supernatural and all things are possible with Him, The 7 days of God`s creation are made up of 7 of God`s days and one of God`s days is as a thousand years to man, so be not ignorant of this, God`s words not mine : 2nd Peter chapter 3 verse 8 will document the reality of The world and ours creation timetable, 7000 years allows for a natural progression, not a flash in the pan creation....

You're using that verse out of context. Similies, please! Did you bother to read the thread?

 

[Pumicestone]

Can someone answer, why the pope himself is announcing that genesis is not accurate and that everything wasn't created in 6 days .....

Well, even the Roman Catholics have to occasionally get something right !

The scientific evidence is just too overwhelming.

 

[Tintin]

Well, even the Roman Catholics have to occasionally get something right !

The scientific evidence is just too overwhelming.

Yes, the scientific evidence is just too overwhelmingly not in evolution's favour.

 

[birdie]

Mark 4:11 says: "And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?The sower soweth the word."

This is saying that the word of God is in parable form and those who are saved are given to understand the mystery of the kingdom of God. However, those who are without (meaning the unsaved) encounter the Bible and it is a parable that they do not understand, for they are not converted.

Another scripture, John 6:63, says: "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

Isn't it interesting that Jesus says that his words are spirit and that is all that matters. I could make up a scripture that says: 'The words that I speak to you, they are science and they are history.' But then, that wouldn't really be a Bible verse would it?

 

[slave]

It is good that you are placing your trust in the Bible as your first source since who wouldn't want to trust what God says first above anything else. However, if you really trust the Bible, then go with what the Bible says about it being written in parable form. The Bible is God's law book, the law of God. Psalm 78:1-2 says that the law is a parable: "...Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.I will open my mouth in a parable..." Also, Mark 4:34 says: "But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples." The word of God is given to us in parable form and Genesis is the same. When Jesus explained how to interpret parables in Mark 4, he showed us that surface stories are not really the real meaning, but surface stories have interpreted meanings quite distinct from the surface text. For example, 'thorns' in the Bible are not really thorns from someone's backyard. 'Thorns' is a parable word meaning "such as hear the word,And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful". Good ground is not likewise soil from a backyard garden. Rather 'good ground' is a parable word meaning " such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an hundred." It is the same thing with Genesis. You cannot read the surface text and have the real interpreted meaning. I could say Genesis says that God made the world in six days but what is the interpreted parable meaning of the surface text? That would be the real meaning. If you rely on surface interpretation of the Bible for your information, then be prepared to chop off your hand if it offends you, and pick up physical serpents, and drink physical poison, and have a physical mark emblazed in your forehead, and to see Christ with a metal sword sticking out of his mouth and so forth. Parables must be interpreted to get at the true meaning. God is constantly interpreting Genesis surface words in other places in the Bible, and in Genesis itself. Light, of course is Christ. Darkness is the absence of Christ. For example, the Bible says heaven is God's throne, not the upper stratosphere, and Jesus is found on the throne, and the throne seems to be in people's hearts, since the Daystar is Jesus is said to arise in people's hearts. John 9:4-5 says that as long as Jesus is in the world it is called Day and light. How long is Jesus in the world? Just 24 hours? Not likely. Is he still in the world as long as he has believers in the world. I think so. What is the darkness that is upon the face of the deep in Genesis 1? 'Deep' is a parable word meaning 'judgment'. Psalm 36:6 says: " ...thy judgments are a great deep..." Is God's judgment the physical ocean or something else? God's judgment is not really the physical ocean, so when the spirit of God moved on the face of the deep, I think it is not talking about the ocean. Genesis says God called the dry land earth. Is earth really planet earth if it is just the dry land? And isn't the dry land a parable phrase for people in need of the water of the gospel?

OK, you need me to explain myself better OK, I will try.I will also answer Jacks question too..Let me answer the part of the 6,000 year earth of man...Let me say I do think a longer time frame is evident in the possibilities of an extended time of History In the Gen. 1:2, version of the earth, but not the Gen. 1:3. And I will state that is my opinion, that science and Scripture coincide with one another generally speaking, I do think personally that science doesn't have the exact numbers right, my doubts in the procedures, are many, but they are closer than people think.

The bible clearly states in Gen. 1:2 that the earth and it's oceans already existed in a darkened, flooded, destroyed state prior to the beginning of creation week in Gen. 1:3, so the earth's original creation has to pre-date the creation week by an indefinite period of time. I have looked at it and I think more 30,000 years than billions, but that is my opinion based on different scientific inclusions of study by more than one scientists, it is possibly more ---I am not God to know which scientists are the accurate ones.

However, The bible explicitly states that mankind and all it's lifeforms now on the surface of the earth come into existence in a Divine, [Logos] creation approximately 6,000 years ago during a literal 6-day week. Given the complex interdependence of the lifeforms on earth, they had to come into existence together to survive in a planetary ecosystem at all.

The bible's creation narratives are not discredited by scientific evidence. Indeed, in the Bible's accounts are affirmed by scientific findings and the geological records. When scientist's assert that physical evidence indicates the universe and earth are years extended from those 6,000 years, that is entirely possible, because they are discussing the original creation of the earth [the creation mentioned in the bible in Gen. 1:1, Job 38:4-7, Isaiah 45:12,18]. Indeed, as I check scriptures references I think the biblical context of the Luciferian rule on earth and the geological/fossil record support an extended time of some measure, a measure I cannot conclude to be accurate. But when I assert that mankind and the current life forms were created in a six-day creation week approx. 6,000 years ago, I am correct because I am discussing the much more recent creation account which begins in Gen, 1:3. Scientists, therefore, and Christian creationists have been talking past each other all along, because they are discussing different creations of God on earth which are eons apart!

Gen. 1:1 is not describing the creation week account which begins in Gen. 1:3. Gen 1:1 barely mentions that there was a primordial creation long prior to an extinction level event which caused the original inhabited and beautiful earth to become a lifeless, flooded, darkened orb in space in Gen. 1:2. Gen. 1:3 begins the account of how God recreated entirely new species [kinds] during creation weeks "recreation" of life on earth after the extinction level event described in Gen. 1:2. The original creation did not include mankind and it was a world dominated by reptilian, serpent-like creatures which went extinct in the extinction level event mentioned in Gen. 1:2.

The second creation of life on earth featured mankind as ruling species [kinds] on earth and the animal world is now dominated by mammals, not reptiles. The extinction level event of Gen 1:2 was the rebellion of Lucifer and the resultant war in the Heavens [Isaiah 14:12-15, Eze. 28:12-17, Luke 10:18 and Jude 6 and 13].

The bible and the true science are in complete agreement. Christians and creationists have nothing by which they need to apologize! I do believe science has a percentage of error, over the ultimate precision of God, yet these parties if looked at in the closeness of the real facts are not in competition with one another as we have placed. However, the two Spirits involved are..and Satan's the liar not God. This is the problem in science.

It is the evolutionists who need to be doing the apologizing for duping mankind into believing such a grandiose fantasy.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

I don't really know any hebrew or Greek but sometimes enjoy discussions here ,sometimes not. I have been around a lot of different types of "scholars" ,and that sometimes , at least half, doesn't mean much .

Here, in those couple sentences, you manage to give credit to scholarship -- I'm assuming you mean the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, since you mention two of them -- but then dismiss it as unimportant to you. As though you are too convinced of your own rightness to be bothered with it. That speaks volumes, my friend, and those volumes don't speak well of your grounding in the faith, or in Christ. Our faith is certainly God-given through His grace, but that doesn't mean we are "zapped" with what we need to know the minute we become believers.

A deep knowledge and understanding of who God the Father, Christ, and God the Holy Spirit is -- "is" being a deliberate usage because they are indeed One though Three -- requires a bow to the scholarship done before us. That doesn't mean, again, everyone has to become a seminary student, but a little reading and study of the foundation of the church and the teaching it has brought forward from the first believers in Jerusalem is essential to know not only what, exactly, we believe, but also why we believe it.

Your comments in that short passage from your post I quoted represents an arrogant dismissal of all of it. That is not a good place to start.

Now How do you know what I deny? what god has done and is to me I don't think I have said enough for you to Know what I "compromise " or don't.Did you read the post I just wrote about God ,Jesus, speaking every thing into being? Check it out . That what I beleive ,the logos Uttered it into physical reality. Go find that will you.

I know that's what you said. But you also appealed to an alternate view of Scripture that doesn't fit what was originally written, and apparently you didn't even know -- or worse, have chosen over time to reject -- that Genesis 1 cannot be made to speak of anything other than a literal, 24-hour day, six-day-long creation. That argument is a construct that is used to undermine the very word you claim to believe.

So where does that leave us? At the very best, it leaves us at odds. At the very worst, one of us refuses to see truth. I'll leave it for God to determine which of us that is.

See here you are crossing the line because of the falsehood of your words Post 174 and if you have read it You are ...well I'lll leave that alone. I don't think I forsook anybody in this , maybe you do, apparently myself any way read that post and tell me I deny Gods speaking thing into existence . I'll expect a reply!!! thanks

One, I didn't say you you "forsook" anyone, only that you commit the same wrong you accuse us of committing -- claiming your view makes you "closer" to God than we are by our interpretation of Scripture. Again, I'll leave it up to God to determine which of us has actually done that.

Two, I did not accuse of you denying God "spoke everything into existence." Not once. But your version of that "speaking" covers billions of years. Is God that slow a Speaker? Would He truly put a long, complex, impossible process into motion and leave His hands off of it a large piece of eternity?

Or would He, being God, simply speak and see it done? The answer seems obvious to me.

Even though He, being a God of endless power and energy, could certainly do it your way if He chose. But the vast waste of time and energy doesn't seem to fit the character of God. If God acts so slowly, how can we expect Him to answer our needs when we place them before Him in supplication?

It is obvious to me, again. God is slow to anger and abounding in grace -- but He doesn't waste time. He is infinite, be we are finite, and as the Creation He loves, He will not tarry over us nor waste our time. He speaks, it exists, instantly, whether that is a universe, or a healing of cancer or an answer to economic woes. Perhaps you can't see the link there. If not, so much the pity.

 

[Tintin]

OK, you need me to explain myself better OK, I will try.I will also answer Jacks question too..Let me answer the part of the 6,000 year earth of man...Let me say I do think a longer time frame is evident in the possibilities of an extended time of History In the Gen. 1:2, version of the earth, but not the Gen. 1:3. And I will state that is my opinion, that science and Scripture coincide with one another generally speaking, I do think personally that science doesn't have the exact numbers right, my doubts in the procedures, are many, but they are closer than people think.

The bible clearly states in Gen. 1:2 that the earth and it's oceans already existed in a darkened, flooded, destroyed state prior to the beginning of creation week in Gen. 1:3, so the earth's original creation has to pre-date the creation week by an indefinite period of time. I have looked at it and I think more 30,000 years than billions, but that is my opinion based on different scientific inclusions of study by more than one scientists, it is possibly more ---I am not God to know which scientists are the accurate ones.

However, The bible explicitly states that mankind and all it's lifeforms now on the surface of the earth come into existence in a Divine, [Logos] creation approximately 6,000 years ago during a literal 6-day week. Given the complex interdependence of the lifeforms on earth, they had to come into existence together to survive in a planetary ecosystem at all.

The bible's creation narratives are not discredited by scientific evidence. Indeed, in the Bible's accounts are affirmed by scientific findings and the geological records. When scientist's assert that physical evidence indicates the universe and earth are years extended from those 6,000 years, that is entirely possible, because they are discussing the original creation of the earth [the creation mentioned in the bible in Gen. 1:1, Job 38:4-7, Isaiah 45:12,18]. Indeed, as I check scriptures references I think the biblical context of the Luciferian rule on earth and the geological/fossil record support an extended time of some measure, a measure I cannot conclude to be accurate. But when I assert that mankind and the current life forms were created in a six-day creation week approx. 6,000 years ago, I am correct because I am discussing the much more recent creation account which begins in Gen, 1:3. Scientists, therefore, and Christian creationists have been talking past each other all along, because they are discussing different creations of God on earth which are eons apart!

Gen. 1:1 is not describing the creation week account which begins in Gen. 1:3. Gen 1:1 barely mentions that there was a primordial creation long prior to an extinction level event which caused the original inhabited and beautiful earth to become a lifeless, flooded, darkened orb in space in Gen. 1:2. Gen. 1:3 begins the account of how God recreated entirely new species [kinds] during creation weeks "recreation" of life on earth after the extinction level event described in Gen. 1:2. The original creation did not include mankind and it was a world dominated by reptilian, serpent-like creatures which went extinct in the extinction level event mentioned in Gen. 1:2.

The second creation of life on earth featured mankind as ruling species [kinds] on earth and the animal world is now dominated by mammals, not reptiles. The extinction level event of Gen 1:2 was the rebellion of Lucifer and the resultant war in the Heavens [Isaiah 14:12-15, Eze. 28:12-17, Luke 10:18 and Jude 6 and 13].

The bible and the true science are in complete agreement. Christians and creationists have nothing by which they need to apologize! I do believe science has a percentage of error, over the ultimate precision of God, yet these parties if looked at in the closeness of the real facts are not in competition with one another as we have placed. However, the two Spirits involved are..and Satan's the liar not God. This is the problem in science.

It is the evolutionists who need to be doing the apologizing for duping mankind into believing such a grandiose fantasy.

Slave, there was only one Creation. Genesis 1:1 sums up what God did. He created the heavens and the earth and everything therein eg. Bob created a model pirate ship. Next sentence: This is how he created the pirate ship. There aren't two ships being created here, but one. Genesis 1:2 goes into some detail about the process of Creation, while still being rather vague. God created order from 'chaos'. Genesis, Chapter 1 is a very generalised look at Creation. Chapter 2 looks at Creation from a human focus. But there's only one Creation. No Gap Theory, no Luciferian or otherwise Flood. Just one global Flood, one Flood at the time of Noah.

Weakness, I don't see myself as better than anyone else here. I apologise for being a bit blunt towards you (I could've been more loving in the initial part of my post, but I refuse to apologise for wanting to hold to the authority of God's Word. Because not all conflict is wrong. Truth often brings conflict to the fore. Think about Jesus. Many people call Him the most tolerant man ever. He was super-loving, yes. But He certainly didn't tolerate people's sins and He was very harsh with the religious people and sometimes even His disciples. Love informed by truth. Not just love. It's not love if we let people believe whatever just because we don't want to upset the applecart. There's a godly balance to be struck here.

 

[GaryA]

It was like a clump of clay on a potter's wheel --- God first created the 'clump of clay' - which was "without form" -- then, in six days - He fashioned it into the 'clay pot' that He desired...

 

[Pumicestone]

Yes, the scientific evidence is just too overwhelmingly not in evolution's favour.

Nahhhh - not getting into this one again - not even with a fellow Aussie.

I've wasted far too many online hours in the last decade or so - but now realize that it will always "evolve" into a debate between faith/belief on one hand and logic/science/evidence on the other.

 

[wincam]

Nahhhh - not getting into this one again - not even with a fellow Aussie.

I've wasted far too many online hours in the last decade or so - but now realize that it will always "evolve" into a debate between faith/belief on one hand and logic/science/evidence on the other.

correction genuine faith/belief on one hand and false faith/belief on the other - wincam

 

[Jeff_56]

Nahhhh - not getting into this one again - not even with a fellow Aussie.

I've wasted far too many online hours in the last decade or so - but now realize that it will always "evolve" into a debate between faith/belief on one hand and logic/science/evidence on the other.

as it is written. "without faith it is impossible to please GOD"

and "woe to you scholars" (you really, really, do not want to know that woe..... no one does, but most go that way with the majority)

 

[Tintin]

Nahhhh - not getting into this one again - not even with a fellow Aussie.

I've wasted far too many online hours in the last decade or so - but now realize that it will always "evolve" into a debate between faith/belief on one hand and logic/science/evidence on the other.

If there was anything to evolution, it wouldn't need to be defended to the 'death' by its high priests and acolytes. There would robust scientific dialogue, with room for other viewpoints and beliefs to be heard. But evolution is founded in human reason and creative storytelling and therefore rests on shaky ground, so it doesn't have a leg to stand on. Hence, the tortured outcries from evolutionary believers. Some much emotionalism, despite all of the talk about evolution being about reason and not beliefs/religion/worldview etc.

 

[Kaycie]

Maybe God can determine a 24 hour period without the sun, and maybe He gave us the sun so we know when those periods start and finish.

 

[weakness]

Here, in those couple sentences, you manage to give credit to scholarship -- I'm assuming you mean the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, since you mention two of them -- but then dismiss it as unimportant to you. As though you are too convinced of your own rightness to be bothered with it. That speaks volumes, my friend, and those volumes don't speak well of your grounding in the faith, or in Christ. Our faith is certainly God-given through His grace, but that doesn't mean we are "zapped" with what we need to know the minute we become believers.

A deep knowledge and understanding of who God the Father, Christ, and God the Holy Spirit is -- "is" being a deliberate usage because they are indeed One though Three -- requires a bow to the scholarship done before us. That doesn't mean, again, everyone has to become a seminary student, but a little reading and study of the foundation of the church and the teaching it has brought forward from the first believers in Jerusalem is essential to know not only what, exactly, we believe, but also why we believe it.

Your comments in that short passage from your post I quoted represents an arrogant dismissal of all of it. That is not a good place to start.

I know that's what you said. But you also appealed to an alternate view of Scripture that doesn't fit what was originally written, and apparently you didn't even know -- or worse, have chosen over time to reject -- that Genesis 1 cannot be made to speak of anything other than a literal, 24-hour day, six-day-long creation. That argument is a construct that is used to undermine the very word you claim to believe.

So where does that leave us? At the very best, it leaves us at odds. At the very worst, one of us refuses to see truth. I'll leave it for God to determine which of us that is.

One, I didn't say you you "forsook" anyone, only that you commit the same wrong you accuse us of committing -- claiming your view makes you "closer" to God than we are by our interpretation of Scripture. Again, I'll leave it up to God to determine which of us has actually done that.

Two, I did not accuse of you denying God "spoke everything into existence." Not once. But your version of that "speaking" covers billions of years. Is God that slow a Speaker? Would He truly put a long, complex, impossible process into motion and leave His hands off of it a large piece of eternity?

Or would He, being God, simply speak and see it done? The answer seems obvious to me.

Even though He, being a God of endless power and energy, could certainly do it your way if He chose. But the vast waste of time and energy doesn't seem to fit the character of God. If God acts so slowly, how can we expect Him to answer our needs when we place them before Him in supplication?

It is obvious to me, again. God is slow to anger and abounding in grace -- but He doesn't waste time. He is infinite, be we are finite, and as the Creation He loves, He will not tarry over us nor waste our time. He speaks, it exists, instantly, whether that is a universe, or a healing of cancer or an answer to economic woes. Perhaps you can't see the link there. If not, so much the pity.

Good morning Val. War... At least morning here. Well.....I don't know where to start , so at the beginning I guess. I do not feel your are trying to debase me, so set your mind at ease. First: I use Strongs a lot and as said I enjoy some of the post about the original languages.But I also said that not all information in said area is very edifying ,at least to me, some are unimportant to me, and maybe others too. Scholars can be just as wrong and off the wall as any one else. Many time after reading or posting I wonder if in original It has some meaning I don't see at face value, and usually look to Strongs. So in FACT( not in untruth) I don't dismiss study of original languages. Also I have never stated WHat I appeal to as as Genesis is concerned, may be other times??? " An arrogent dismissal" I think God could make creation in six seconds if he wanted, but don't think he wanted.We need not that any man teach us, the Spirit searches the deep things of God, He that is born of God Knows God, The Spirit will lead us into all truth. Whether it the Spirit in another believer or through Something else, The creation declares his glory, day unto day utters speech.... Ps. Yes there is non righteous no not one. My view makes me no closer to God, I was just saying we should be more civil and gentle in our discussion, and that we all have different measures of Christ and could influence how we might look at a passage at a particular time, not that a passage is true or untrue. " Two I did not accuse you of denying God spoke everything into existence" #181.... "by denying the power of Christ by his ability to speak everything into existence" May be your are reading "behind" these words also, like you do others I have written. Are not you saying I am denying Christ ability to speak everything into existence????????? Doesn't this say I'm denying Christs power by denying his ability to speak everything into existence??????. May be wake up and go back to sleep. I did not deny I think, the six day account nor did I confirm it Because that was not my point of posting. I don't wish to comment on the Wasted time segment ,but I think energy and God try to conserve and are Good steward of what they possess. I really wonder about you and your dialoge to me. Why??? I could address more of what you think about me and what I have written, but am tired even though I just got up. Some times People can see in other what they are unable to admit in themselves. It is good to get thing out there sometimes, but if in denial and in the deceitfulness of sin it is a different story. And I thank you for giving my lord "permission as to which of us is not seeing the truth. MY belief is we both fall far short without the righteousness of Christ imparted so graciously to us. David

 

[JimmieD]

Maybe God can determine a 24 hour period without the sun, and maybe He gave us the sun so we know when those periods start and finish.

Isn't a reference to the sun part of the definition of a 24 hour period? It seems without the sun, "24 hours" is a meaningless concept. It's definitional to say that 24 hours is the time it takes earth to make one revolution around the sun.

I would think if your worldview requires a denial of the definition of a 24 hour period, then you've probably gotten something wrong in your worldview.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Good morning Val. War...

Not my name, but oh well ...

At least morning here. Well.....I don't know where to start ... [lots and lots of words that edify the member making the post and tear down everyone else] ... so graciously to us. David

David, that is perhaps the most self-serving, self-righteous post I've read recently.

You quite obviously are exactly as I say -- self-anointed spokesman for God, closer to Him and with better understand of Him and His word than anyone else. I find there is little use in attempting to hold a discussion with such a person.

I have nothing more to say to you. Good day, and God bless.