The Genesis Theory

[abelcainsbrother]

The first day starts in verse 3 not verse 1.Keep this in mind when you read Genesis 1.

If you don't believe me start on day 6 and write down every thing God did on each day counting backwards on each day and you'll see the only thing God did on day 1 was say "Let there be light" and he divided the light from darkness on the first day that starts in verse 3.

This means the heavens and the earth were already created and you cannot say in good biblical conscience it was 6000 years ago,it could have been billions of years when it was "In the beginning"

Also there is absolutely no contradiction between the bible and the secular scientific evidence we all know about (if you don't look at the evidence from an evolution perspective like most do) and it confirms the bible true.

But it doesn't if you look at it from a young earth interpretation.

St Augustine living 500 years ago believed this too,so stop with the false information about making evolution science fit into it.The fact is science is confirming it true while trying to push evolution.Compare 500 years from Augustine to 150 years of evolution.

[PaulSacramento]

PaulS wrote:
We get the creation of the world (not the universe since there is no mention of the universe) from God.

<a class="rtBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nasb95/Genesis%201.1" data-reference="Genesis 1.1" data-version="nasb95" data-purpose="bible-reference" target="_blank">Genesis 1:1</a>
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

The word for "heavens" is shamayim. Which means:

heaven, heavens, sky

visible heavens, sky

as abode of the stars

as the visible universe, the sky, atmosphere, etc

Heaven (as the abode of God)

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lex ... 064&t=NASB

Not sure how you missed that one Paul. It is the very first verse in the bible.

Nah, you are reading into it.
Genesis is not about the creation of the universe per say.
Look at the passage in the first day:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

It could have been written this way even:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night...

A statement about God creating the heavens and Earth and then the account of how He did it.

I mean, look how it states that there was water and yet the Earth was formless and void.
Which implies a lack of stability, of "solidness" a lack of established "form".

Paul,
Does the word "heavens" in Genesis 1:1 come from the word "shamayim", which means visible universe, or not?
It was a statement that in the beginning(of creation) God created all that exists(the universe). Then the focus switches to the earth. I'm only reading the actual meaning of the word "heavens" into it. It's not rocket surgery. It's a pretty basic, commonly accepted interpretation of Genesis 1:1.

Universe in what context?
All that is visible?
Yes, I agree.
Universe as WE know it? Nope.

[Storyteller]

On the home site somewhere there is an article about how Genesis is understood. I can`t find the article (maybe someone else can?) but in it, it explains how Genesis 1 and 2 explain the Big Bang and how the universe developed. From what I remember it suggested that God wouldn`t have done it in literal 24 hour days.

[abelcainsbrother]

On the home site somewhere there is an article about how Genesis is understood. I can`t find the article (maybe someone else can?) but in it, it explains how Genesis 1 and 2 explain the Big Bang and how the universe developed. From what I remember it suggested that God wouldn`t have done it in literal 24 hour days.

This is a good point and there is a lot of good scientific evidence in it however it does not effect the theory of evolution while the gap theory does.Also it is looking at much of the evidence in science that was based on proving evolution true which IMO causes there timing to be off because of evolution and this causes problems for me.

As a Christian I want evolution to be defeated because so many people have been deceived by it and only the gap theory can defeat the theory of evolution,none of the other creation theories have effected evolution and it is tolerated which I don't like.

Pretty much the same evidence used as evidence for evolution confirms and proves the gap theory true,not evolution.

When we look in the earth and find fossils and evidence of death and extinction? It proves a former world existed on this earth full of life that perished and has nothing whatsoever to do with life evolving.

[Storyteller]

On the home site somewhere there is an article about how Genesis is understood. I can`t find the article (maybe someone else can?) but in it, it explains how Genesis 1 and 2 explain the Big Bang and how the universe developed. From what I remember it suggested that God wouldn`t have done it in literal 24 hour days.

This is a good point and there is a lot of good scientific evidence in it however it does not effect the theory of evolution while the gap theory does.Also it is looking at much of the evidence in science that was based on proving evolution true which IMO causes there timing to be off because of evolution and this causes problems for me.

As a Christian I want evolution to be defeated because so many people have been deceived by it and only the gap theory can defeat the theory of evolution,none of the other creation theories have effected evolution and it is tolerated which I don't like.

Pretty much the same evidence used as evidence for evolution confirms and proves the gap theory true,not evolution.

When we look in the earth and find fossils and evidence of death and extinction? It proves a former world existed on this earth full of life that perished and has nothing whatsoever to do with life evolving.

There's also a page on the Gap theory which makes for interesting reading.

[RickD]

On the home site somewhere there is an article about how Genesis is understood. I can`t find the article (maybe someone else can?) but in it, it explains how Genesis 1 and 2 explain the Big Bang and how the universe developed. From what I remember it suggested that God wouldn`t have done it in literal 24 hour days.

1) This is a good point and there is a lot of good scientific evidence in it however it does not effect the theory of evolution while the gap theory does.Also it is looking at much of the evidence in science that was based on proving evolution true which IMO causes there timing to be off because of evolution and this causes problems for me.

2) As a Christian I want evolution to be defeated because so many people have been deceived by it and only the gap theory can defeat the theory of evolution,none of the other creation theories have effected evolution and it is tolerated which I don't like.

3) Pretty much the same evidence used as evidence for evolution confirms and proves the gap theory true,not evolution.

4) When we look in the earth and find fossils and evidence of death and extinction? It proves a former world existed on this earth full of life that perished and has nothing whatsoever to do with life evolving.

1) ACB,
Any creation position if true, proves the ToE wrong. But as of now, none are proven true.

2) any creation position if true, can "defeat" the ToE. Actually IMO, YEC would prove the ToE false because evolution needs more time than thousands of years, to work. So, if your goal is to defeat evolution, why don't you go with YEC? At least that way you'd be taking scripture literally, right?

3) the evidence does not "prove" the gap theory. You believe it shows the gap theory is true. But "proves"? Nah.

4) the fact in itself, that life existed and died millions of years ago, neither proves nor disproves evolution.

If you want to believe in the GT, that's fine. But you'd probably do better if you don't keep saying the evidence "proves" the GT.
It makes you sound like you aren't being honest.

[abelcainsbrother]

On the home site somewhere there is an article about how Genesis is understood. I can`t find the article (maybe someone else can?) but in it, it explains how Genesis 1 and 2 explain the Big Bang and how the universe developed. From what I remember it suggested that God wouldn`t have done it in literal 24 hour days.

1) This is a good point and there is a lot of good scientific evidence in it however it does not effect the theory of evolution while the gap theory does.Also it is looking at much of the evidence in science that was based on proving evolution true which IMO causes there timing to be off because of evolution and this causes problems for me.

2) As a Christian I want evolution to be defeated because so many people have been deceived by it and only the gap theory can defeat the theory of evolution,none of the other creation theories have effected evolution and it is tolerated which I don't like.

3) Pretty much the same evidence used as evidence for evolution confirms and proves the gap theory true,not evolution.

4) When we look in the earth and find fossils and evidence of death and extinction? It proves a former world existed on this earth full of life that perished and has nothing whatsoever to do with life evolving.

1) ACB,
Any creation position if true, proves the ToE wrong. But as of now, none are proven true.

2) any creation position if true, can "defeat" the ToE. Actually IMO, YEC would prove the ToE false because evolution needs more time than thousands of years, to work. So, if your goal is to defeat evolution, why don't you go with YEC? At least that way you'd be taking scripture literally, right?

3) the evidence does not "prove" the gap theory. You believe it shows the gap theory is true. But "proves"? Nah.

4) the fact in itself, that life existed and died millions of years ago, neither proves nor disproves evolution.

If you want to believe in the GT, that's fine. But you'd probably do better if you don't keep saying the evidence "proves" the GT.
It makes you sound like you aren't being honest.

That is a good point you make about saying proof perhaps I should say confirm or make more sense than looking at it from an evolution perspective.YEC has had its chance to defeat evolution and has'nt.

I don't think you get the picture I see when it comes to the gap theory defeating evolution like I do.

YEC have good success pointing out the lack of evidence life evolves but because they teach a young earth it makes everything else they say wrong.Now when I say proof,I know nothing can truly be proven but I'm talking about evidence for a theory that makes it true.

We as Christians can already point out the lack of evidence life evolves and we could do the samething using the gap theory but then we could take all of the evidence in science used as evidence life evolves but use it instead to confirm a former world did indeed exist that perished,then we can prove this was believed by St Augustine 500 years age based on his writings and show how the evidence confirms it and not evolution.

Sure nobody can change any bodies mind but it will be more believable and credible looking at the evidence from this perspective instead of evolution .Then explain how Charles Darwin hijacked the beginnings of the evidence in science that was proving the gap theory true and made evolution fit into it and give evidence to back it up.

Evolution would not look so convincing.