The Gap theory

[abelcainsbrother]

I went from OEC to TE to PC back to TE and to be honest, none of that really affected my faith in God or the bible.
It was just how I was reconciling science with the bible.
It truly doesn't matter that much at all IMO.
By the way, evolution is now to Darwin what space travel is to Da Vinic.

Don't get me started about evolution because all the evidence will show and demonstrate is that God created life to breed and produce after its kind. I used to be YEC and then I got into Intelligent design for alittle while,then I discovered Gap Theory creationism.What is appealing to you about TE? How do you get passed the question of death before Adam?

Abel, you have no correct understanding of evolution, far less of TE.
I tried in the past to explain and you just either didn't get or didn't want to, either way aI am not going there.

I will simply ask you this:

Do you believe that what we believe in regards to creation leads us to salvation or is required to be saved?

No I don't believe that you must follow a certian creation theory to be saved however I do think that creationism can be used to help lead someone to Christ and I think there are examples that I could point to.I bet there are people who have been won to Christ with TE.However, no creationism has nothing to do with salvation or being saved. I just believe this interpretation is right and I've tried to show and explain why not only biblically but other ways also.I do believe there is a crisis in creationism too though and it is based on what I experience and run into,other people may not run into it though and so they don't see what I see.

[Storyteller]

Know what? Before I came to Christ I never gave any thought to how everything was created, just that it was. Now, I lean towards OEC/Progressive creationism, or maybe TE. Its not a major thing though, just a detail.

Maybe the crisis you run into is because you hold to the Gap Theory?

(and acb, none of this is personal, I'm actually really fond of you)

[Philip]

BW: "All I can suggest is that folks thank God he created in the first place and had the plan of redemption in mind before anything ever was."

AMEN! The rest are the unknowable specifics! But as for the KNOWABLE specifics, that God created all that exists, that He loves us, came humbly into the world, taught and did amazing, miraculous things, and died a horrific death on a Roman cross to redeem us, and rose from the dead / will come again - THESE are the ONLY specifics that TRULY matter!

And the above is why I care less and less about the creation views of others that don't agree with my own. If a person is a true follower of Jesus Christ, then I AM his brother in Christ. The only time I really get worked up over a Creation stance is if someone tries to assert their INTERPRETATION of the Scriptures should be some kind of orthodox belief that authenticates them to be a Christian or any more spiritual than anyone else. Well, actually, there is one more thing that riles me: It's when someone - be they a Christian or not (but ESPECIALLY if they are a Christian) - asserts that what is written in Scripture is not God's word or that it is somehow mistaken - this is very dangerous. And so, while everyone's interpretation might be wrong, we know that SOMEHOW that Scripture is 100% correct. To not believe so is to doubt the very words of Jesus and the Apostles.

[abelcainsbrother]

Know what? Before I came to Christ I never gave any thought to how everything was created, just that it was. Now, I lean towards OEC/Progressive creationism, or maybe TE. Its not a major thing though, just a detail.

Maybe the crisis you run into is because you hold to the Gap Theory?

(and acb, none of this is personal, I'm actually really fond of you)

On here I might be aggrivating about the Gap Theory however when I'm out trying to reach the lost.I don't think it has to do with Gap creationism.It would not matter what creation theory I held to. I've actually seen improvement holding to Gap creationism however if they were every won to Christ because of Gap Creationism the way other Christians deny Gap creationism it could hurt their faith.That is why if it ever comes up on here I do not cut somebody else off.

[Storyteller]

How, why, would a denial of a creation theory hurt someones faith?
What if youre wrong about the Gap Theory, how much would that hurt someones faith?

You, my friend, have such conviction, if you spoke about Christ, and salvation like you do GT, well, I think you'd be awesome.

[abelcainsbrother]

How, why, would a denial of a creation theory hurt someones faith?
What if youre wrong about the Gap Theory, how much would that hurt someones faith?

You, my friend, have such conviction, if you spoke about Christ, and salvation like you do GT, well, I think you'd be awesome.

I don't know perhaps it is the creation theory that makes the most sense to them but yet it is rejected.I could be wrong about the Gap Theory,and if I was wrong?It would/could hurt somebodies faith that is why I have thoroughly critiqued it and researched it over time to make sure it is right and that is all I or anybody can do. Thanks for the kind words my friend and advice. Jesus said "If I be lifted up? I will draw all men unto me."

[DBowling]

Thanks to Rick for pointing me to this thread
Here's our last back and forth for continued discussion...

From the Adam Has To Be Real Thread

God created on day 5 sea creatures,and every living creature that moveth,which the waters brought forth abundantly,after their kind.and every winged fowl after his kind:and God saw it was good." God created these but let's go into day 6 and you'll see God MADE animals -"And God MADE the beast of the field after his kind,and cattle after their kind,and everything that creepeth upon the earth after his kind:and God saw it was good.

Genesis 2:2-4 "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had MADE;and he rested on the seventh day from all his word which he had MADE.
"And God blessed the seventh day,and sancified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which he CREATED and MADE."
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were CREATED,in the day that the LORD God MADE the EARTH and the HEAVENS."

It is important that we know the difference between created and made to understand Genesis 1 properly.Moses stressed this.

As you demonstrate above God does both create (bara) and make (asah) things during the six creation 'days'.

The difference between 'bara' and 'asah' does nothing to alleviate the direct contradiction between the Gap Theory sequence of events and the sequence of events given in Scripture in Genesis 1.

The Gap theory asserts that sea and air creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.
In Genesis 1 Scripture explicitly states that God created (bara) sea and air creatures after Genesis 1:2.

The Gap Theory asserts that land creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.
In Genesis 1 Scripture explicitly states that God made (asah) land creatures after Genesis 1:2.

So it doesn't matter what definition or significance you apply to 'bara' and 'asah'. According to Genesis 1, God populated the planet with life (using both bara and asah) after Genesis 1:2.
Which directly contradicts the Gap Theory which asserts that God populated the planet with plant and animal life prior to Genesis 1:2.

In Christ

But How can you say that if God both created and made life it does'nt show that God had already created life before?

Very easily...
There is nothing in the words create (bara) or made (asah) that demands (or even implies) that the item being made or created had been made or created previously.
That is an extrascriptural presumption that is being imposed on the text.

Scripture says that the heavens and earth were both created (bara) and made (asah) by God.
That in no way logically implies that God had created/made the heavens and earth before Genesis 1:1 and then destroyed them and created them again in Genesis 1:1.

In Genesis 1:26-27 human imagebearers of God are both created (bara) and made (asah) by God.
That in no way logically implies that God had previously created/made human imagebearers and then destroyed them all prior to mankind's creation in Genesis 1:26-27.

As we see above, the Gap Theory imposes a number of extraScriptural presumptions upon the Scriptural text. And in the case of Genesis 1, the Gap Theory comes into direct conflict with the Scriptural sequence of events explicitly laid out in Genesis 1.

You have mentioned a number of times that your desire is to submit to the authority of Scripture over the authority of the traditions of men.

I share that desire. Which is why I am compelled to dismiss a human tradition that was invented in the 1800s when it comes into direct conflict with the explicit teaching of Scripture.

In Christ

Are you angry or frustrated? Because if you are I don't wanr to further frustrate you.I want to know that you are OK with discussing this further if not then I don't want to go on. I believe I can show why you are wrong about "bara" and "asah" but I don't want to go on if you are not in the right frame of mind. I'm not frustrated eventhough we disagree about this. I can agree to disagree.

OK... show me where you think I'm wrong about 'bara' and 'asah'...

[Storyteller]

[abelcainsbrother]

Thanks to Rick for pointing me to this thread
Here's our last back and forth for continued discussion...

From the Adam Has To Be Real Thread

As you demonstrate above God does both create (bara) and make (asah) things during the six creation 'days'.

The difference between 'bara' and 'asah' does nothing to alleviate the direct contradiction between the Gap Theory sequence of events and the sequence of events given in Scripture in Genesis 1.

The Gap theory asserts that sea and air creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.
In Genesis 1 Scripture explicitly states that God created (bara) sea and air creatures after Genesis 1:2.

The Gap Theory asserts that land creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.
In Genesis 1 Scripture explicitly states that God made (asah) land creatures after Genesis 1:2.

So it doesn't matter what definition or significance you apply to 'bara' and 'asah'. According to Genesis 1, God populated the planet with life (using both bara and asah) after Genesis 1:2.
Which directly contradicts the Gap Theory which asserts that God populated the planet with plant and animal life prior to Genesis 1:2.

In Christ

But How can you say that if God both created and made life it does'nt show that God had already created life before?

Very easily...
There is nothing in the words create (bara) or made (asah) that demands (or even implies) that the item being made or created had been made or created previously.
That is an extrascriptural presumption that is being imposed on the text.

Scripture says that the heavens and earth were both created (bara) and made (asah) by God.
That in no way logically implies that God had created/made the heavens and earth before Genesis 1:1 and then destroyed them and created them again in Genesis 1:1.

In Genesis 1:26-27 human imagebearers of God are both created (bara) and made (asah) by God.
That in no way logically implies that God had previously created/made human imagebearers and then destroyed them all prior to mankind's creation in Genesis 1:26-27.

As we see above, the Gap Theory imposes a number of extraScriptural presumptions upon the Scriptural text. And in the case of Genesis 1, the Gap Theory comes into direct conflict with the Scriptural sequence of events explicitly laid out in Genesis 1.

You have mentioned a number of times that your desire is to submit to the authority of Scripture over the authority of the traditions of men.

I share that desire. Which is why I am compelled to dismiss a human tradition that was invented in the 1800s when it comes into direct conflict with the explicit teaching of Scripture.

In Christ

Are you angry or frustrated? Because if you are I don't wanr to further frustrate you.I want to know that you are OK with discussing this further if not then I don't want to go on. I believe I can show why you are wrong about "bara" and "asah" but I don't want to go on if you are not in the right frame of mind. I'm not frustrated eventhough we disagree about this. I can agree to disagree.

OK... show me where you think I'm wrong about 'bara' and 'asah'...

DBowling eventhough we may disagree I don't want to divide us over this. I do like to discuss these creation theories but they are not meant to divide brothers and sisters in Christ. I want you to know that just because we might differ on creation,I'd still like to be your friend on here.

[abelcainsbrother]

Thanks to Rick for pointing me to this thread
Here's our last back and forth for continued discussion...

From the Adam Has To Be Real Thread

As you demonstrate above God does both create (bara) and make (asah) things during the six creation 'days'.

The difference between 'bara' and 'asah' does nothing to alleviate the direct contradiction between the Gap Theory sequence of events and the sequence of events given in Scripture in Genesis 1.

The Gap theory asserts that sea and air creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.
In Genesis 1 Scripture explicitly states that God created (bara) sea and air creatures after Genesis 1:2.

The Gap Theory asserts that land creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.
In Genesis 1 Scripture explicitly states that God made (asah) land creatures after Genesis 1:2.

So it doesn't matter what definition or significance you apply to 'bara' and 'asah'. According to Genesis 1, God populated the planet with life (using both bara and asah) after Genesis 1:2.
Which directly contradicts the Gap Theory which asserts that God populated the planet with plant and animal life prior to Genesis 1:2.

In Christ

But How can you say that if God both created and made life it does'nt show that God had already created life before?

Very easily...
There is nothing in the words create (bara) or made (asah) that demands (or even implies) that the item being made or created had been made or created previously.
That is an extrascriptural presumption that is being imposed on the text.

Scripture says that the heavens and earth were both created (bara) and made (asah) by God.
That in no way logically implies that God had created/made the heavens and earth before Genesis 1:1 and then destroyed them and created them again in Genesis 1:1.

In Genesis 1:26-27 human imagebearers of God are both created (bara) and made (asah) by God.
That in no way logically implies that God had previously created/made human imagebearers and then destroyed them all prior to mankind's creation in Genesis 1:26-27.

As we see above, the Gap Theory imposes a number of extraScriptural presumptions upon the Scriptural text. And in the case of Genesis 1, the Gap Theory comes into direct conflict with the Scriptural sequence of events explicitly laid out in Genesis 1.

You have mentioned a number of times that your desire is to submit to the authority of Scripture over the authority of the traditions of men.

I share that desire. Which is why I am compelled to dismiss a human tradition that was invented in the 1800s when it comes into direct conflict with the explicit teaching of Scripture.

In Christ

Are you angry or frustrated? Because if you are I don't wanr to further frustrate you.I want to know that you are OK with discussing this further if not then I don't want to go on. I believe I can show why you are wrong about "bara" and "asah" but I don't want to go on if you are not in the right frame of mind. I'm not frustrated eventhough we disagree about this. I can agree to disagree.

OK... show me where you think I'm wrong about 'bara' and 'asah'...

Here are the definitions of "asah" and "bara"

asah
Phonetic: aw-saw'
BDB Definition:
to do, fashion, accomplish, make
(Qal)
to do, work, make, produce
to do
to work
to deal (with)
to act, act with effect, effect
to make
to make
to produce
to prepare
to make (an offering)
to attend to, put in order
to observe, celebrate
to acquire (property)
to appoint, ordain, institute
to bring about
to use
to spend, pass
(Niphal)
to be done
to be made
to be produced
to be offered
to be observed
to be used
(Pual) to be made
(Piel) to press, squeeze

Bara

baw-raw'
BDB Definition:
to create, shape, form
(Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
of heaven and earth
of individual man
of new conditions and circumstances
of transformations
(Niphal) to be created
of heaven and earth
of birth
of something new
of miracles
(Piel)
to cut down
to cut out
to be fat
(Hiphil) to make yourselves fat
Origin: a primitive root
TWOT entry: 278
Part(s) of speech: Verb
Strong's Definition: A primitive root; (absolutely) to create ; (qualified) to cut down (a wood), select, feed (as formative processes): - choose

These definitions are from Strong's concordance and notice that "asah" is first and "bara" is below. Go ahead and read the definitions enough to remember what they mean.Ifyou do this? I think that you see that "asah" means to do,fashion,produce,make ,to do work on something,form something,to attend to and put in order.

OK now look at "bara" and it means to create something new,new conditions and circumstances,of birth,of something new.

So if we compare definitions I think you'll agree that when we see the word created(bara)anywhere in the OT it means God created and brought into being something new but when we see made "asah" it means to work on something that is not new like with bara,it is God just working on something anytime we see made in the OT.

Now if we have that established now read Genesis 1 keeping the meanings of bara and asah in your mind while you read it.This means in Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." it means they are new and it is the sameway everytime you see created in the whole OT.
so let's try it out with Genesis 1:21 :And God CREATED great whales,and every living creature that moveth,which the waters brought forth abundantly,AFTER THEIR KIND,and every winged fowl AFTER HIS KIND:and God saw it was good."

Ok now since the word created is used here this means this is new life the whales and every living creature that moveth,etc and notice after their kind, after their kind means God created these creatures NEW after kinds of life that had already existed before,this is why it says God created them after their kind. They had already lived before and God is creating NEW life based on old life after their kind.

OK but lets go to another place where MADE is used Genesis 1:16 "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."
OK now since asah is here these were things God just did work on so they already existed and are not new,they are already there and God does work on them,to attend to,to put in order. So that we know these were already there and God just did work on them to make them shine again. They were not shining,but they were already there,but not shining,so God does work on them to turn them on.

Now I hope that you will see how it matters to know and understand the difference everytime you see created and every time you see made. They are similar but are never interchangeable like critics often claim.

Now all I can do is give evidence but I cannot change anybody's mind or creation theory,that is up to them but I believe I have showed enough to show that it matters to know the difference. and now read Genesis 2:2-4 again because Moses stresses for us to know the difference in order to interpret not only Genesis 1 and 2 but the whole OT.

If you follow these definitions as you read the OT you're going to interpret it different and the whole point of this is to show that the only thing God did during the 6 days is work on things that had already been created before.He did not create in the 6 days he restored the earth and the heavens by working on them and then he created and made sea creatures,animals and even when it comes to man you still need to keep MADE and created in mind when you read about it. Don't interchange the definitions suddenly when it comes to man in day 6,still hold to the meaning of created and made as you read it.
You'll see that God CREATED man so he was NEW.

[DBowling]

So if we compare definitions I think you'll agree that when we see the word created(bara)anywhere in the OT it means God created and brought into being something new but when we see made "asah" it means to work on something that is not new like with bara,it is God just working on something anytime we see made in the OT.

I am aware of the differences in meaning between 'bara' and 'asah'. I generally buy into the premise that they have different meanings, but Genesis 1:26-27 does cast some potential doubt on that premise within the context of the Genesis 1 creation account. Notice that in Genesis 1:26 God says let us make (asah) mankind in our image, then in the very next verse he actually carries out his decree by creating (bara) mankind in his image. So one can make a very good case based on Genesis 1:26-27 that bara and asah are interchangeable within the context of the Genesis 1 Creation account.

But we don't even need to go there to demonstrate the Gap Theory contradiction with Scripture.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that asah within the context of Genesis 1 means to make something out of preexisting material.
You seem to be asserting that if God made (asah) something then by definition the something that he made already existed at some point in time before he made it.
That is not what asah means.

When God creates land animals in day 6 that does not mean that animals preexisted before he created them in day 6. Using your definition of asah it means that God made something new (ie land animals) out of preexisting material.

And even using your definition of 'bara' (create), the Gap Theory still directly contradicts Genesis 1 regarding the creation of creatures in the sea and air in Genesis 1:21.
Genesis uses the word bara (create) in Genesis 1:21, but the Gap Theory asserts that air and sea creatures existed some time before God created (bara) them on day 5.

In Christ

[abelcainsbrother]

So if we compare definitions I think you'll agree that when we see the word created(bara)anywhere in the OT it means God created and brought into being something new but when we see made "asah" it means to work on something that is not new like with bara,it is God just working on something anytime we see made in the OT.

I am aware of the differences in meaning between 'bara' and 'asah'. I generally buy into the premise that they have different meanings, but Genesis 1:26-27 does cast some potential doubt on that premise within the context of the Genesis 1 creation account. Notice that in Genesis 1:26 God says let us make (asah) mankind in our image, then in the very next verse he actually carries out his decree by creating (bara) mankind in his image. So one can make a very good case based on Genesis 1:26-27 that bara and asah are interchangeable within the context of the Genesis 1 Creation account.

But we don't even need to go there to demonstrate the Gap Theory contradiction with Scripture.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that asah within the context of Genesis 1 means to make something out of preexisting material.
You seem to be asserting that if God made (asah) something then by definition the something that he made already existed at some point in time before he made it.
That is not what asah means.

When God creates land animals in day 6 that does not mean that animals preexisted before he created them in day 6. Using your definition of asah it means that God made something new (ie land animals) out of preexisting material.

And even using your definition of 'bara' (create), the Gap Theory still directly contradicts Genesis 1 regarding the creation of creatures in the sea and air in Genesis 1:21.
Genesis uses the word bara (create) in Genesis 1:21, but the Gap Theory asserts that air and sea creatures existed some time before God created (bara) them on day 5.

In Christ

OK we disagree and it is OK you IMO are interchanging the definitions of "bara" and "asah" and you bring up the reason why you do it. You think there is some discrepancy when God says let us MAKe man in our image,you see a discrepancy that causes you to interchange "bara" and "asah" and I don't. There is nothing wrong at all with God saying Let us MAKE man in our image because we know a pre-Adamite race of beings existed in the former world and Gap Theorists have been mentioning a pre-adamite race existed long before they were ever even discovered in the earth so that is is like a fulfilled bible prophecy that was realized once they were finally discovered. This is why it angers Gap Theorist about how Charles Darwin took our evidence we had first and made evolution fit into it. This revelation has been covered up.

So that we have God's words telling us that God both CREATED and MADE life for this world AFTER THEIR KIND. Yet you probably think that the phrases AFTER THEIR KIND or AFTER HIS KIND is talking about reproduction,but I don't see how you can make reproduction fit into this text.

It is apparent by the wording when God does mention reproduction and there are examples I can point to like Genesis 8:15-19. We know that in this case God is talking about reproduction but not in Genesis 1 unless it is apparent.

I mean you can choose to interchange "bara" and "asah" while I don't. Because I know that God created man after a pre-Adamite race of beings that were not man no matter how much evolution says so,I know they existed in the former world until it perished.

And when I see God both CREATED and MADE animals AFTER THEIR KIND I also know animals and these kinds of life existed in the former world also along with the pre-Adamite race of beings that Geology/Paleontology shows lived on the earth long,long before God MADE this world for life in this world Genesis 2:2-4

There is no discrepancy when God said "Let us MAKE man in our image because when God CREATED them they were NEW creations just like in Genesis 1:1 and anywhere else in the OT you see the world created or "bara" it is always something new and is not something new when you see made or "asah" anywhere in the OT too.

[DBowling]

OK we disagree and it is OK you IMO are interchanging the definitions of "bara" and "asah" and you bring up the reason why you do it. You think there is some discrepancy when God says let us MAKe man in our image,you see a discrepancy that causes you to interchange "bara" and "asah" and I don't.

Actually that's not quite what I'm saying...
There is no contradiction between bara and asah being interchangeable. There is enough overlap in the definitions of the two words that there is no discrepancy.

However, that is not the main point that I'm making.
The point I'm making is that it doesn't matter whether or not bara and asah are interchangeable. The Gap Theory directly contradicts the Genesis 1 narrative either way.
If both asah and bara refer to God fashioning or forming something, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 contradicts the Gap Theory.
If asah means fashioning or forming something out of preexisting material, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 contradicts the Gap Theory.
If bara means fashioning or forming something out of nothing, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 contradicts the Gap Theory.

There is nothing wrong at all with God saying Let us MAKE man in our image because we know a pre-Adamite race of beings existed in the former world and Gap Theorists have been mentioning a pre-adamite race existed long before they were ever even discovered in the earth.

Let's take another look at Genesis 1:26-27.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

These verses are not referring to a group of hominid beings that were created prior to Genesis 1:2.
Both Genesis 1:26 (asah) and 27 (bara) are referring to human imagebearers of God that were created on Creation Day 6 which takes place after Genesis 1:2.

So that we have God's words telling us that God both CREATED and MADE life for this world AFTER THEIR KIND. Yet you probably think that the phrases AFTER THEIR KIND or AFTER HIS KIND is talking about reproduction,but I don't see how you can make reproduction fit into this text.

It's pretty easy, because that is exactly what the text is saying.
The text is telling us that reproducing "according to their kind" is a fundamental inherent quality of the life that God formed to populate the earth.

BTW... Reproduction "according to their kind" is probably the most significant Scriptural argument against Darwinistic trans-species evolution.
Knowing your feelings about evolution, I'm a bit surprised that you would assert Scripture is not talking about life reproducing "according to its kind".

In Christ

[abelcainsbrother]

OK we disagree and it is OK you IMO are interchanging the definitions of "bara" and "asah" and you bring up the reason why you do it. You think there is some discrepancy when God says let us MAKe man in our image,you see a discrepancy that causes you to interchange "bara" and "asah" and I don't.

Actually that's not quite what I'm saying...
There is no contradiction between bara and asah being interchangeable. There is enough overlap in the definitions of the two words that there is no discrepancy.

However, that is not the main point that I'm making.
The point I'm making is that it doesn't matter whether or not bara and asah are interchangeable. The Gap Theory directly contradicts the Genesis 1 narrative either way.
If both asah and bara refer to God fashioning or forming something, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 contradicts the Gap Theory.
If asah means fashioning or forming something out of preexisting material, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 contradicts the Gap Theory.
If bara means fashioning or forming something out of nothing, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 contradicts the Gap Theory.

There is nothing wrong at all with God saying Let us MAKE man in our image because we know a pre-Adamite race of beings existed in the former world and Gap Theorists have been mentioning a pre-adamite race existed long before they were ever even discovered in the earth.

Let's take another look at Genesis 1:26-27.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

These verses are not referring to a group of hominid beings that were created prior to Genesis 1:2.
Both Genesis 1:26 (asah) and 27 (bara) are referring to human imagebearers of God that were created on Creation Day 6 which takes place after Genesis 1:2.

So that we have God's words telling us that God both CREATED and MADE life for this world AFTER THEIR KIND. Yet you probably think that the phrases AFTER THEIR KIND or AFTER HIS KIND is talking about reproduction,but I don't see how you can make reproduction fit into this text.

It's pretty easy, because that is exactly what the text is saying.
The text is telling us that reproducing "according to their kind" is a fundamental inherent quality of the life that God formed to populate the earth.

BTW... Reproduction "according to their kind" is probably the most significant Scriptural argument against Darwinistic trans-species evolution.
Knowing your feelings about evolution, I'm a bit surprised that you would assert Scripture is not talking about life reproducing "according to its kind".

In Christ

You kidding?I defeat evolutionists quite often.I just use the proper scripture where God is talking about reproduction - life breeding and producing after its kind and it is not talking about reproduction there, imo you are making reproduction fit into it. I understand though because I did not realize what I've tried to show you for years,I totally overlooked it and it is easy to do,until it was pointed out to me. I can see that we are just not going to agree,so I'll just agree to disagree. Thanks for the discussion about this.

Here I'll give you an example of me defeating an evolutionist in a debate online. Go down to the comment section and you'll see my name and read through the comments. It is the first comment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDgciyXq_f8

[DBowling]

I would like to respond to your last post before we wrap things up

I just use the proper scripture where God is talking about reproduction - life breeding and producing after its kind and it is not talking about reproduction there, imo you are making reproduction fit into it. I understand though because I did not realize what I've tried to show you for years,I totally overlooked it and it is easy to do,until it was pointed out to me.

Even if "according to their kind" does not explicitly refer to reproduction, that still does not imply that plants and animals existed prior to being created or made by God in Genesis 1.

"according to their kind" is referring to the object being made/created, and in no way implies that the object being made/created pre-existed before it was made/created.

This can be easily demonstrated by examining how this Hebrew phrase is used elsewhere in Scripture.

Here are some examples:
Leviticus 11:13-19

13 ‘These, moreover, you shall detest among the birds; they are abhorrent, not to be eaten: the eagle and the vulture and the buzzard, 14 and the kite and the falcon in its kind, 15 every raven in its kind, 16 and the ostrich and the owl and the sea gull and the hawk in its kind, 17 and the little owl and the cormorant and the [h]great owl, 18 and the white owl and the pelican and the carrion vulture, 19 and the stork, the heron in its kinds, and the hoopoe, and the bat.

Deuteronomy 14:11-20

11 “You may eat any clean bird. 12 But these are the ones which you shall not eat: the eagle and the vulture and the buzzard, 13 and the red kite, the falcon, and the kite in their kinds, 14 and every raven in its kind, 15 and the ostrich, the owl, the sea gull, and the hawk in their kinds, 16 the little owl, the great owl, the white owl, 17 the pelican, the carrion vulture, the cormorant, 18 the stork, and the heron in their kinds, and the hoopoe and the bat. 19 And all the teeming life with wings are unclean to you; they shall not be eaten. 20 You may eat any clean bird.

So when you assert that the phrase "according to their kind" or "in their kinds" somehow implies that plants and animals existed before God created them in Genesis 1 then you are directly contradicting the Scriptural sequence of events given in Genesis 1.

In Christ