A CHRISTIAN WHO BELIEVES THAT EACH DAY OF CREATION WEEK WAS MILLIONS OF YEARS.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Feb 10, 2012
20
0
0
#82
Dont know how he meant this, but as I understand it, the lawful use would be using the law for our learning, yet not binding it upon ourselves or others - Rom 15:4.
The verse that nails this is...

Romans 10:4
(4) For the Messiah is the culmination of the Law as far as righteousness is concerned for everyone who believes.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#83
I take it you are a Covenant Theologian? I am a Dispensationalist.
I don't know about that, don't feel like looking up the definition for "Covenant Theologian" but I guess it's possible sine I don't know the definition.

What I do know is the Bible is clear the Law of Moses was not permanent, in merely typified Christ and His church - Heb 10:1.

Christ fulfilled the law and took it out of the way - Col 2:14.

This enabled all to become the sons of God if they wish, not limited to physical Jews. In a sense when we are outside of Christ we are Gentiles, when we submit to his will we are made spiritual "Jews" by the circumcision of the heart. I understand we are not really Jews in any since of the word.

People make to big a deal about the modern Jews today, when the Bible does not. Most of the prophecies concerning the Jews in the OT (which many are still looking at modern Israel) were fulfilled with Christ's death and the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Christians are now God's people, not Jews or any other.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#84
A day comes by the earth spinning on its axis, not by the sun and moon
I dont think that's "stupid" I agree. When God set things into motion it did not matter if the sun and moon were created yet. He knew what length he would make a day and a week and the seasons. Sun, Moon, stars, and the earth's rotation all are essential in US counting the days not God.
 
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#85
It occurs to me that, even if not all are saved, we really don't know which people will be saved and which will not. We know that Christ commanded us to spread the Good News of Christ's life, death, and glorious resurrection, so we should preach that to ALL people. Should we not treat every human we meet as a child of God, potentially saved?
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
#86
:rolleyes:

Are you seriously this stupid?
:LOL:

I think you better go back to school if you don't know how we get a day. The Bible says that the earth was created in 6 days and everything in it and He rested the 7th. The person who wrote that in Exodus 20:11 is the same writer who wrote Genesis 1 and when he wrote it a day was the same length of time as it is now. To believe that it was millions of years is mixing in evolution with creation. It is just trying to change the meaning of the Bible to fit evolutions ideas.

We either believe the word of God or we do not.
Exodus 20:11
(11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#87
:LOL:

I think you better go back to school if you don't know how we get a day. The Bible says that the earth was created in 6 days and everything in it and He rested the 7th. The person who wrote that in Exodus 20:11 is the same writer who wrote Genesis 1 and when he wrote it a day was the same length of time as it is now. To believe that it was millions of years is mixing in evolution with creation. It is just trying to change the meaning of the Bible to fit evolutions ideas.

We either believe the word of God or we do not.
Exodus 20:11
(11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
well stated.

A chicken Atheist is an agnostic while the chicken Christian is a Theistic Evolutionist.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#88
I think you better go back to school if you don't know how we get a day.
Different cultures use language differently. That's something you might learn at school. But not in a backwards Christian-only don't teach anything about science or anything that might threaten your fragile faith school. No, you'd have to go to an accredited institution of learning for that.

I'm sorry if that sounds rude and harsh, but honestly, accusing someone of lacking knowledge for actually being more educated than you are is just too much. Now, if you have faith that God meant six 24-hour days, then fine, that is your faith, and I support your right to hold that faith. However, those who understand Genesis as myth do not lack knowledge. They may lack faith -- they certainly do not have the same beliefs that you have -- but to accuse someone of being "uneducated" just because they have a different opinion?

The person who wrote that in Exodus 20:11 is the same writer who wrote Genesis 1
Actually, no. Even the most conservative theologians accept the four-source theory of the Pentateuch which states that Genesis and Exodus were not written by one person, and not even by four people, but by four groups of people, each with its own agenda.

To believe that it was millions of years is mixing in evolution with creation. It is just trying to change the meaning of the Bible to fit evolutions ideas.
I actually agree. Trying to force the story of Genesis to make it "fit" evolution totally misses the point. Genesis 1 is not a story of evolution, it's a story of creation. It was never intended to be taken literally. Genesis 2 is another story, completely different, contradictory, in fact, to Genesis 1. The two stories don't even agree with each other, I don't expect either one to agree with science. Trying to twist either one around and make it scientifically accurate actually ruins the beauty of the myth that God intended them both to be.

We either believe the word of God or we do not.
If you want to place your faith in a book that has changed and been altered over the ages, that is your right. As for me and my house, we shall worship the Lord.
 
Apr 13, 2011
2,229
11
0
#89
...If you want to place your faith in a book that has changed and been altered over the ages, that is your right. As for me and my house, we shall worship the Lord.
If you don't believe the bible, how do you know who you are worshiping?
 
H

HeIsNowHere

Guest
#90
The issue is more about why those Christians try to inject millions of years into the plain writing and language of the history of the earth found in Genesis. The reason is because the prevailing naturalists require billions of years for their anti-Creator religion. Theiir stories are everywhere so Christians believe they must compromise with the Naturalists. But being a Christian requires one to be Supernaturalist. Do you believe in the Virgin birth which is not natural? How about the Physical resurrection of Jesus Christ? Again this is supernatural. How about all the miracles of Jesus, how about a donkey talking to a man, all the events of Moses, angels winning wars, and on and on. If this is true, then why can you as a Christiian simply not accept God's Word given to us by Moses while he was on the Mountain and God spoke wiith him (again supernatural) as written or why are you so bent on compromising God's Word with Naturalists who are anti-Creator, anti-Christ? And what about revelation and what is to come in the Bible? Is this not supernatural. Read John 1:3 "Through him (Jesus Christ) All things were made and without him nothing was made that has been made." You wanna be a Christian then stop tyring to be a naturalist who you have nothing in common with.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#91
Different cultures use language differently. That's something you might learn at school. But not in a backwards Christian-only don't teach anything about science or anything that might threaten your fragile faith school. No, you'd have to go to an accredited institution of learning for that.
That is why we define words as how they are used on scripture. There is nothing in the immediate nor the remote context to suggest the word day (yom) meant anything else than a regular 24-hour day.

I'm sorry if that sounds rude and harsh, but honestly, accusing someone of lacking knowledge for actually being more educated than you are is just too much.
That did not sound "rude" just arrogant. I know you were not talking to me, but hey this is a discussion forum.

Actually, no. Even the most conservative theologians accept the four-source theory of the Pentateuch which states that Genesis and Exodus were not written by one person, and not even by four people, but by four groups of people, each with its own agenda.
A true "conservative" would believe the word of God.
And I will never let their views and theories change what the world of God teaches, no matter how much they cannot accept, miracles, prophecies, etc.

2 Corinthians 3:15 Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts.




I actually agree. Trying to force the story of Genesis to make it "fit" evolution totally misses the point. Genesis 1 is not a story of evolution, it's a story of creation. It was never intended to be taken literally.
Can you show me why you can make such an assertion that Genesis "was never intended to be taken literally"? Please show me by scripture how you came to that conclusion and not by the theories of your "Conservative scholars".
If you can show by scripture, I can at least try to understand your view, if not then you need to read Gal 1:10.

Genesis 2 is another story, completely different, contradictory, in fact, to Genesis 1. The two stories don't even agree with each other, I don't expect either one to agree with science. Trying to twist either one around and make it scientifically accurate actually ruins the beauty of the myth that God intended them both to be.
Again, please show the bases for your strong assertions. Just saying they do not agree without any support is nothing but talk.


If you want to place your faith in a book that has changed and been altered over the ages, that is your right. As for me and my house, we shall worship the Lord.
You cannot worship the Lord without putting your faith in His word - II Tim 3:15-17. It is by His word that we are made complete, instructed in righteousness, reproved, rebuked, without it you have nothing but a twisted view and a weak faith because you don't believe God could deliver us a word that is unbreakable. In fact "the scripture cannot be broken" do you not believe God in this?
In fact, who is your God, what way did you learn about him, surely not from some book that has been altared? How could you ever trust that?(<--- sarcasm)
 
Oct 12, 2011
1,123
3
0
#92
I'm no Genius here but doesn't it say........Evening and morning was the first day.....

Evening and morning was the second day.......ect..ect.....

Isn't that only 12 hrs.?
 
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#93
A true "conservative" would believe the word of God.
And I will never let their views and theories change what the world of God teaches, no matter how much they cannot accept, miracles, prophecies, etc.
Believing the word of God does not require that one believes that it is literal. Why would it? Where in Scripture does it say that in order to believe it you have to believe that it is literal?

When Jesus said that he was the vine and we were the branches, was he being literal? And if you don't believe that he was being literal, does that mean you reject the entire Scripture and the whole of Christianity?

Or maybe you think that Jesus speaks in parables, but God does not, because Jesus isn't really God? Can you point out to me where it says that Jesus is not God in Scripture?

Can you show me why you can make such an assertion that Genesis "was never intended to be taken literally"?
By a simple reading of the text. It's obvious by reading the text, without any preconceived notions, that the writer of Genesis 1 intended it to be taken as myth. It's a story, a song. Each verse is the day and its creation, and the refrain comes back at the end, "and it was morning, and it was evening, the ___ day." When I read it the first time for myself at the age of 5, with no one telling me one way or another, it was obvious to me that it was one of God's most beautifully told stories.

You cannot worship the Lord without putting your faith in His word
I don't believe in God because of something written in a book. I believe in God because of what is written on my heart.

It is by His word that we are made complete,
Well, I can't speak for you, but it is Jesus Christ, not the bible, that makes me complete. Once again, you are dangerously close to idolatry, worshiping the creation rather than the Creator.

In fact, who is your God, what way did you learn about him, surely not from some book that has been altared? How could you ever trust that?(<--- sarcasm)
Like I said, I believe because what is written on my heart. That cannot be corrupted.
 

tribesman

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2011
4,622
282
83
#94
Those that say that the Bible is corrupted and should not be trusted will usually, nevertheless, yet have their choosen raisins from the cake, and point to biblie verses that are to be taken most literally.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#95
Believing the word of God does not require that one believes that it is literal. Why would it? Where in Scripture does it say that in order to believe it you have to believe that it is literal?
Because God gave us common sense to discern, figurtive language, illistrations, similes, metaphors, and literal language. For example when Chirst said, "herod is a fox" we know he is not a literal fox, Christ was simply using a metaphor to describe Herod's personality. When he said he is the vine we are the branches, he was using a parable to teach a hidden truth, which by the way he explained when the disciples asked why He used parables. When interpreting scripture we should not assume something is not literal unless the context and meaning demands it to be, as with Herod being a fox and Jesus a vine. Genesis does not demand this one bit. It is not using an illustration, nor a parable, no metaphors, but giving an account.

When Jesus said that he was the vine and we were the branches, was he being literal? And if you don't believe that he was being literal, does that mean you reject the entire Scripture and the whole of Christianity?
I answered that in the above statement.
Or maybe you think that Jesus speaks in parables, but God does not, because Jesus isn't really God? Can you point out to me where it says that Jesus is not God in Scripture?
Straw man argument here. I never said that, and neither did any of my statements imply that I believe Jesus is not God. The question is why would you try to put up this straw man argument in the first place?
And what if I did show you what you are asking in scripture, you believe your "heart" remember, so what would be the importance of any thing the Bible says?


By a simple reading of the text. It's obvious by reading the text, without any preconceived notions, that the writer of Genesis 1 intended it to be taken as myth.
You keep saying this but providing no support for such a claim. Where do you see this? Which part is a myth? If all of it, show me the reason or support for
your assertion.

It's a story, a song. Each verse is the day and its creation, and the refrain comes back at the end, "and it was morning, and it was evening, the ___ day." When I read it the first time for myself at the age of 5, with no one telling me one way or another, it was obvious to me that it was one of God's most beautifully told stories.
I agree beautiful, yet literal. Why? because there is nothing warranted by scripture to cause me to think otherwise. Second you should more research, the literal account fits with science, not evolution.
And it is not a song, the ending is not a repetitive ending in a song, it is marking the days.



I don't believe in God because of something written in a book. I believe in God because of what is written on my heart.
WELL who knows where you will go with this one, but I will ask anyway.
How do you know God exists? Does he write on your heart things apart from His word? How do you know Jesus said "he is the vine"? How do you know about Jesus?


Well, I can't speak for you, but it is Jesus Christ, not the bible, that makes me complete. Once again, you are dangerously close to idolatry, worshiping the creation rather than the Creator.
First of all, you need to study what the idolatry is. It is the worship of an object. I am not praying to the Bible, singing to the Bible, giving as I prosper to the Bible, this is all to God because the Bible tells me to. this is nowhere near idolatry, in fact your saying if one believes and practices what is written in the bible they are an Idolater. Now anyone who comes to such a gross conclusion must have a belief straight from Satan, of course I am sure you don't believe in him as literal but something like a figure for evil, but I guess I should not assume things (look where it has gotten you).


Like I said, I believe because what is written on my heart. That cannot be corrupted.
Well if your heart tells you the opposite of what the Bible says, then I would question who putting things into your heart. It is the Bible that tells us what to do to be saved, not our hearts

Rom 1:16 - for I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, it is the power of God unto salvation...."

II Tim 3:16 "All scripture is given by the inspiration (literally God breathed) of God....."

Jn 12:48 - "he that recieveth not my word has one that judgest him, the word that I have spoken shall judge him in the last day".........where is this word????? In the Bible.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#96
I'm no Genius here but doesn't it say........Evening and morning was the first day.....

Evening and morning was the second day.......ect..ect.....

Isn't that only 12 hrs.?
The evening marked the end of the 12 hours of light - from sunrise to sunset

The morning marked the end of 12 hours of night - From sunset to sunrise

12 hrs to evening + 12 hrs to daybreak = 24 hrs.

So the evening (12 hrs to get there) and the morning (12 more hrs to get there) were the first day.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#97
The issue is more about why those Christians try to inject millions of years into the plain writing and language of the history of the earth found in Genesis. The reason is because the prevailing naturalists require billions of years for their anti-Creator religion. Theiir stories are everywhere so Christians believe they must compromise with the Naturalists. But being a Christian requires one to be Supernaturalist. Do you believe in the Virgin birth which is not natural? How about the Physical resurrection of Jesus Christ? Again this is supernatural. How about all the miracles of Jesus, how about a donkey talking to a man, all the events of Moses, angels winning wars, and on and on. If this is true, then why can you as a Christiian simply not accept God's Word given to us by Moses while he was on the Mountain and God spoke wiith him (again supernatural) as written or why are you so bent on compromising God's Word with Naturalists who are anti-Creator, anti-Christ? And what about revelation and what is to come in the Bible? Is this not supernatural. Read John 1:3 "Through him (Jesus Christ) All things were made and without him nothing was made that has been made." You wanna be a Christian then stop tyring to be a naturalist who you have nothing in common with.
Great post, I think you hit the nail right on the head even if the theistic evolutionists wont admit it.
 
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#98
Because God gave us common sense to discern, figurtive language, illistrations, similes, metaphors, and literal language.
Well, it seems God did not give everyone common sense.

Genesis does not demand this one bit. It is not using an illustration, nor a parable, no metaphors, but giving an account.
Except that it IS figurative. I don't understand how anyone can't see how obvious it is. Like I said, it was obvious to me when I was 5.

You keep saying this but providing no support for such a claim.
I've provided all the support I can. I can't dumb it down any more than that. It's already at the level of a 5-year-old, so I'm sorry, I just don't know what else to say. If you don't get it by now, there's nothing more I can do for you.

Like I said, I support your right to hold your faith that it is literal. You can cling to that if you want. It makes no sense to me, but if you need to believe that it is literal, go for it.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
#99
Well, it seems God did not give everyone common sense.
Personal attacts are just a sign of frustration from a weak argument.


Except that it IS figurative. I don't understand how anyone can't see how obvious it is. Like I said, it was obvious to me when I was 5.
Well what you thought was obvious when you were 5 is not enough reason for me to distrust the word that the Almighty Father has given us. I just think, if you really had a good argument you would have subsituted this "obvisous when I was 5" argument that proves nothing and just shows you really have nothing.

I've provided all the support I can. I can't dumb it down any more than that. It's already at the level of a 5-year-old, so I'm sorry, I just don't know what else to say. If you don't get it by now, there's nothing more I can do for you.
Okay so you've gone from personal attacks to putting on a front as if you actually backed up your arguments all in one post.
Like I said, I support your right to hold your faith that it is literal. You can cling to that if you want. It makes no sense to me, but if you need to believe that it is literal, go for it.
"support"???? Lets see, I have "no common sense" need the Bible to be "dumbed down" and am "clinging" to the Bible.
If you call this support....nevermind.

I will "cling" to the word of God until I die. why because of what it say and because "I am not ashamed of the gospel...." unlike many who really are.

Anyway, if you come up with any valid support for your claims and drop the "when I was 5" as your only support, I will be ready to listen.
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
Well, it seems God did not give everyone common sense.


Except that it IS figurative. I don't understand how anyone can't see how obvious it is. Like I said, it was obvious to me when I was 5.


I've provided all the support I can. I can't dumb it down any more than that. It's already at the level of a 5-year-old, so I'm sorry, I just don't know what else to say. If you don't get it by now, there's nothing more I can do for you.

Like I said, I support your right to hold your faith that it is literal. You can cling to that if you want. It makes no sense to me, but if you need to believe that it is literal, go for it.
It doesn't need to make sense we just need to believe the Bible. there is evidence of a young earth.

101 - The Earth In Time And Space - Amazing Discoveries TV