iamaberean
New member
Peter explains it like this:
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
ECT Clearing up the confusion of Creation!
- Thread starter iamaberean
- Start date
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
6days
New member
Read Gen. 1
6days
New member
Yes, God is that patient waiting for people to turn to Him. But, that verse doesnt justify your belief that Jonah lived in a fish for 3,000 years. A day is one evening and one morning. Gen. 1:5
Context is usually important when trying to understand a verse. The verse you gave is not saying that God experiences a day like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day. The verse is saying, if you would have read the following verse, that God is longsuffering, patient, his promise doesn't have any slack in it, if he can wait a day for someone to come to Him, He could wait a thousand years.
In fact, the first 9 verses of that chapter are titled "God's promise is not slack."
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
God's Truth
New member
That scripture says nothing about dinosaurs.
iamaberean
New member
God is not a man, that he should lie.
Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie;
A faithful witness will not lie.
Pro 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
Be careful that we don't lie against the truth.
Jas 3:14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
Christians should not walk in darkness but rather accept the truth of God's word.
1Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
If one walks in darkness, they can not see truth.
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Gen 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
Adam live 930 man years, but less than one of God's day.
iamaberean
New member
God is not a man, that he should lie.
Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie;
A faithful witness will not lie.
Pro 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
Be careful that we don't lie against the truth.
Jas 3:14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
Christians should not walk in darkness but rather accept the truth of God's word.
1Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
If one walks in darkness, they can not see truth.
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Gen 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
Adam live 930 man years, but less than one of God's day.
Once again, "A thousand years is as a day, and a day as a thousand years" is NOT referring to keeping time. It's a measure of God's patience. I am addressing not the support verses you present, but your entire foundation of your beliefs. You have no foundation to stand on when correctly interpreting the verse.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
6days
New member
You didn't read very carefully. Try again.
iamaberean
New member
jsanford108
New member
1.) In what way does my theory "destroys the purpose of Christ's physical death and resurrection?" You keep saying that, but are providing no reason or logic behind your statement.
2.)You said I am "ignoring creationist interpretations." Exactly! I am refuting an "interpretation," not a fact or a law. And that is my entire point, here. To provide an alternate interpretation that includes physical and natural evidence, refutes evolution, and still remains within the confines of God's Word.
3.) I do not believe evolutionist ideas. Some concepts of evolutionary theory are clearly evident. However, the theory of evolution as a whole has been refuted time and again since the early 50's, if not before then. (I am just recalling a few instances from the off the top)
4.) Time and again, you keep saying I am ignoring Moses, Biblical Authors, etc. I am not ignoring them. I am telling you to view everything from their perspective. Their limited, ancient, pre-industrial perspective. If they saw an atom bomb go off, how would they describe it? They could not describe it effectively. Why? Because they are limited to their knowledge of their time.
5.) You keep referring to Hebrew Scholars. I will clue you in on a little issue with them. How can they be reliable sources when they deny Christ and the Trinity? (Granted, they are great sources for accurate Hebrew languages and culture, etc)
And finally, to answer your question. I am a person who says that science helps confirm the truths of Scripture. Science does not support the young earth theory. The scientists who produce evidence that supports the young earth theory are, guess what, already young earth theorists long before they were scientists. I accept the words of Jesus. The foundation of the world, from the beginning of creation, all of this fits within both of our conflicting theories. If you want to be technical, which at many times is your argument (such as the 24 hour day), then we would both be wrong. Because the beginning of creation was day one. Man wasn't made until the last day. So, it stands logically that the phrase "beginning of creation," and "foundation of the world," would be the entire span of the creation event.
jsanford108
New member
Ah, oh wise one. Glad you could chip in. A Hebrew "day" is sundown to the next sundown. Right you are. So why would a Hebrew author, Moses, say the "morning and evening were the first day?" Kind of punches a hole right in that smart argument of yours, doesn't it? Because any Jew would know that a day begins at sundown and not in the "morning."
So next time you want to inform anyone of "basics of the topic," be constructive. Test the criticisms you have of others points against your own. Because what you just presented could not even stand against its own mitigating factors.
jsanford108
New member
How long was a rotation of the earth in hours? You won't find an answer in the Bible. It never defines the span of time other than "morning, evening," and "day." I will give you that the Bible does give a "time span," using words such as morning, evening, and day. So you got me there. But nowhere in Genesis does it define time in the units we utilize today.
6days
New member
Remove those hands from your eyes. Myself and others have explained that if death existed before sin, and God called it "very good", then Christ did not need defeat physical death. Your belief system means Christ died in vain.*jsanford108 said:
Even atheists understand that if they can get people to compromise on Genesis, the gospel becomes meaningless. Just yesterday I read an article showing how some atheists have posed as theistic evolutionists, encouraging Christians to become theistic evolutionists.*
Since you did not read previous posts explaining how your beliefs destroy the gospel... here is one of the previous posts ... I will try condense it for you.
A Theologian Answers
According to the Bible, there was no death until there was sin. The creation is cursed only after Adam sinned (cf. Genesis 3;*Romans 5:12–21;*8:19–25). *If there was blood and violence in the creation before Adam sinned, the theological structure of the biblical message would appear to suffer considerable dislocation"
An Atheist Answers
"if Adam and Eve and the Talking Snake are myths, then Original Sin is also a myth, right? Well, think about it.
"Jesus’ major purpose was to save mankind from Original Sin.Original Sin makes believers unworthy of salvation, but you get it anyway, so you should be grateful for being saved (from that which does not exist)Without Original Sin, the marketing that all people are sinners and therefore need to accept Jesus falls moot.
"All we are asking is that you take what you know into serious consideration, even if it means taking a hard look at all you’ve been taught for your whole life. No Adam and Eve means no need for a savior. It also means that the Bible cannot be trusted as a source of unambiguous, literal truth. It is completely unreliable, because it all begins with a myth, and builds on that as a basis. No Fall of Man means no need for atonement and no need for a redeemer. You know it."
A Christian Apologist Answers
“Since the doctrines of Creation, the Fall and Redemption stand in an absolute historical continuum, we get a distorted worldview when we play games with Genesis.
“The apologist seeks to present biblical truth with coherence. In my experience, one cannot even formulate a compelling response to classic questions like the problem of evil and pain without a clear stand with Scripture on the creation issue.
“I have never been able to see how anyone who wants to defend the faith and proclaim the Gospel can compromise the foundation stones of that defence and then expect clear-thinking people to find a proclamation of salvation in Christ compelling.”
A Prof / PhD Biblical Studies Answers
*"Often, people will use the old argument that we should concentrate on preaching the Gospel, rather than get distracted by ‘side-issues’ such as Creation. But if we cannot believe the record of Creation, then why believe the record of the New Creation (‘if anyone is in Christ, he is a New Creation; the old is gone, the new has come’—2 Corinthians 5:17)?”
A Biologist Answers
"Many Christians have compromised on the historical and theological importance of Genesis. If Adam and Eve aren’t real people who sinned in the Garden of Eden, and as a result we are all not sinners, then Jesus Christ’s death on the cross was useless. ...the literal truth of Genesis is so important to the authority and truthfulness of Scripture. It is the very foundation of the Gospel."
jsanford108
New member
At no point am I saying death exists before sin. There would be no death before the Fall. I see how you are deriving that now though from my proposal. And it is an adequate challenge. Thank you for finally just saying the point. I had read all the random "answers," but they didn't really pertain to our discussion. But since you clearly stated an excellent point, I have to rework my theory. The key disclaimer to my theory is the limits of carbon dating. Yet, your point, though good, doesn't demonstrate how my theory renders Christ useless. It just shows the flaw that, according to science, death would exist before the fall of man.
6days
New member
This is a small part of what I said. Here is the full sentence. "No..... you are believing evolutionist and secular ideas, ignoring creationist interpretations and God's Word.jsandord108 said:
Your compromise in Genesis has lead you to a low view of scripture, and our Creator. *Scripture was given by God; and is not a product of ramblings of dim witted ancient man. Does your view of scripture cause you to be skeptical of all the miracles, since it was recorded by ancient, pre-industrialized goat herders?jsandord108 said:
We are giving each other clues now?jsandord108 said:
Here is one for you. The OT original language is Hebrew. We rely on Hebrew scholars for our modern translations and commentaries.*
If you wish more clues, I can show you from the Hebrew, and from an exegetical study of the word 'yom', that the creation days are the same as what we now call a 24 hour day.
You wouldn't know as you don't understand science. You confuse evolutionism with science. If you wish to show some understanding, give an explanation to comets that I asked you before, that doesn't rely on beliefs.*jsandord108 said:
You seem to know a lot of things which aren't true. If you want more 'clues' I can help you out with Biblical young earth PHD scientists who made the journey from atheism. (Geneticist, biologist, geologist)*jsandord108 said:
No...you spin the words of Jesus. You argued that He didn't mean the beginning of creation, but He meant the beginning of humanity.jsandord108 said:
*God describes the beginning as a process of 6 days. *So yes, Jesus was accurate describing humanity from the beginning of creation...an event about 6,000 years ago. *It would seem you think humanity came along billions of years after God started creating?*jsandord108 said:
6days
New member
You are trying to pretend you understand science. Did you know C14 dating is good for only about 50,000 years? Did you know soft dinosaur tissue C14 dates at 30-40,000 years which is consistent with Biblical creation and the flood. (For explanation, read previous post in this thread on the topic)jsanford108 said:
Haha...NO NO NO!!!!!!..... You keep confusing evolutionary beliefs with science.*jsanford108 said:
God's Truth
New member
Why don't you show me where Genesis 1 speaks of dinosaurs.
iamaberean
New member
Until sin came into the world, there was no death. For thousands of years animals reproduced and filled the earth. One species, the reptiles, continued to grow and they became the dinosaurs you ask about.
Some people ask, "How could Noah get dinosaurs on the ark?". He took the youngsters.
Check out these two, gigantic gators.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwRK_LiEnZY&app=desktop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWS5xfIaoeA&app=desktop