Evidence for God from Science

abelcainsbrother wrote:...Thanks for the explanation. I shall consider it but I have never thought of it this way. I've never thought Genesis chapter 2 tells us what all happened in the 6th day. I've always thought it just explains a little more about God creating Adam and Eve and then placing them in the garden of Eden,it seems speculative to know how long it took God to place Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. I guess it could have been right after however it does not say,it could have been after the 6th day. Plus we have the "and the evening and the morning"problem also.

Now when I think about science and the Big Bang Theory the bible seems to describe not only the Big Bang but both the 1st and 2nd laws of Thermodynamics too, still for some reason when I read Genesis I'm not sure how it would fit into it, but I like Hugh Ross and highly respect his knowledge of science and I loved it when he defeated atheist scientist Victor Stingor in the debate they had.Hugh Ross had Stingor bringing up unsubstantiated scientific ideas trying to make it substantiated science. I really believe had Hugh Ross came to the Lord with the Gap Theory?

The theory of Evolution would have been defeated long ago and Hugh Ross rejects evolution too. I wonder if some knowledgable Gap Theorists could change Hugh Ross's mind to accept the Gap Theory? I doubt it. There were some Gap Theorists joking about several of them going to Ross to try to convince him to change his mind,but I said I doubt it would change his mind,but its worth a try.

All creation account theories are theories. The Gap was long held in vogue. Clarence Larken chartered it out during its heyday of acceptance. Then there is the YEC and OEC theories.

The main point of the Creation account is that God created, period. With that we can all agree.

Like Rick pointed out, in ancient Hebrew, Yom, was used to denote time several ways. God created during His creation Day time frame, not ours. His ways are not our ways and his time is not our time. God acts in our time as well as outside of it. God is timeless, eternal. Since he is, his sense of time contains that part of himself.

It was not until the 4th Creation day that there was ever a 24 hour earth day created. Our time is not his. We cannot demand that he adhere to our timetable as he knows when best to act and answer our prayers.

Why do we demand that God must be YEC or else? I don't know?

After looking into his these many years as a Christian, first a YEC, then thought of GAP, then after careful study of the Hebrew text in Genesis and grammar, word, meanings and symbols, and logic I am OEC for the fact that it does not matter how old or young the earth is, just that God made it all, and in that, I am content.

What caught my attention to OEC on a progression scale was coming to understand how the Hebrew's thought through a problem to solve it. They allowed free flowing exchange of ideas and from these one found truth. One reason for my own OEC position is that God's time is not ours. No one can measure his days. The idiom expression, one day to God is as a thousand years and a thousandth year is as one day, gives clue to this found in 2 Pet 3:8.

Add to this that His creation Days are not the same time duration is found during the 4th day of creation when earth time was clearly established. God's narrative of creation uses his time zone, not ours. Another thing that struck me is the use of backtracking in ancient text writers employed. Gen 2:4 shows this clearly.

Gen chapter one makes it clear it was on God's sixth day of creation he made human beings and ends in Gen 1:31 declaring all was good by the end of the sixth day, so good in fact God rested on the seventh creation era. Chapter two backtracks and then adds more details on the Sixth creation day era of time giving details. No other time could Genesis chapter two happen especially if it it was really a 24 hour day.

If this was merely a 24 hour earth day, then a lot happened. Way too much to be possible. If it is the case of a earth day period of 24 hours, then Adam and Eve lost paradise within a 48 hour period. That is a pretty hectic schedule. Now if God's creation days are based on his own eternal time, then His 6th creation day lasted many-many earth 24 hour periods, long enough for Adam and Eve to carry out the task of the Garden God had them do. Then God declares it is good and moves into His own next creation day - a day of rest.

During that day, it is picked up in Genesis chapter 3. Adam and Eve were not working. Must have been resting when the serpent came and they fell away from God and removed from Eden. The earth day seventh day commentates our resting in God, his word, his provision, and our falling away from this, and our regaining entering his rest through what Jesus Christ did for us by Grace.

In all appearances, we are still living in God's seventh day Rest period so we can honor it by taking one day out of the week to recall what happened and how our reconciliation. This day is not Saturday or one particular solar calendar day but rather under the grace of the NT it is any day we deem to take.

OEC progression allows for God to be God, the GAP as well does so too to act in any manner for however long he wants his creation days to be. How long they are is only known to him and in that, I am content and humbled.

The logic of the ancient Hebrew language does not suggest God's creation's days are equal to a 24 hour earth day. God's evening, morning, and sundown is quite different than our earth day. God lives in Heaven's dimension and time, not ours.

I recall how a Messianic Jewish Rabbi once asked me, "You think Adam lived 930 years total or would that rather be after the fall. After all God did say, in the day you eat - you will die/die!"

I think that one comment turned me to realize OEC is at least humble enough to say, "God, however long or short your creations days were does not matter - only you do - You created it all, amen."
-
-
-

B.w. they did die the day they ate... They started dying immediately, I believe that, and the text poses no threat to yec.

I suppose one could read in the text as y'all do, that well it didn't say 'today', it didn't say what day, or a numbered day, didn't say instantly. But we know that's not how you interpret scripture, well God could of meant this because He didn't explicitly say it wasn't, oh animals could of ate meat cause God didn't say what they couldn't eat- He just said what He gave them to eat, or God didn't say He or yourself couldn't pluck you out of His hand- only that any other man couldn't. I find this absurd and ridiculous.

zacchaeus wrote:B.w. they did die the day they ate... They started dying immediately, I believe that, and the text poses no threat to yec.

I suppose one could read in the text as y'all do, that well it didn't say 'today', it didn't say what day, or a numbered day, didn't say instantly. But we know that's not how you interpret scripture, well God could of meant this because He didn't explicitly say it wasn't, oh animals could of ate meat cause God didn't say what they couldn't eat- He just said what He gave them to eat, or God didn't say He or yourself couldn't pluck you out of His hand- only that any other man couldn't. I find this absurd and ridiculous.

Zacchaeus,

Here are two possibilities that maybe you haven't considered, regarding dying on the day they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

1) Adam and Eve were kept alive physically, because they ate of the tree of life. When they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, God removed their access to the tree of life. Which took away their physical immortality. So they died.

2) the death God was talking about, was spiritual. In the day they ate, they died spiritually. They lost their relationships with God.

As far as whether or not man was vegetarian, the text doesn't say that. So, by reading that God gave them plants to eat, and assuming it means that they cannot eat meat, YOU are reading into the text.

That's ridiculous considering He said He gave them every herb, seed, and fruit bearing tree for them as 'meat'. Saying what He didn't say is to assume Gods train of thought, and we know in various other threads what assume really means.

Following the theme of scripture He says the same exact thing to the animals, your 'meat' is herbs, seeds, fruit. The text isn't for negotiation on this issue, because we have more than one witness (scritpure). And when scripture interprets itself we see that we will go back to the state of the garden where the lion lays with the lamb and the boy plays with the vipers in which neither hurt the other. It's in gen, Isaiah, rev, and probably numerous other places.

zacchaeus wrote:That's ridiculous considering He said He gave them every herb, seed, and fruit bearing tree for them as 'meat'. Saying what He didn't say is to assume Gods train of thought, and we know in various other threads what assume really means.

Zman,

The word you translated as meat, doesn't necessarily mean meat. It can mean just plain food.
'oklah

zacchaeus wrote:Following the theme of scripture He says the same exact thing to the animals, your 'meat' is herbs, seeds, fruit. The text isn't for negotiation on this issue, because we have more than one witness (scritpure). And when scripture interprets itself we see that we will go back to the state of the garden where the lion lays with the lamb and the boy plays with the vipers in which neither hurt the other. It's in gen, Isaiah, rev, and probably numerous other places.

Again, meat doesn't necessarily mean "meat", like animal meat. It just means food.

So, the text still needs to be interpreted. You just take your interpretation to be equal to scripture, which is the height of hubris.

*****Edit*****
Is it possible that the biblical text is saying that all the animals in the garden were herbivores?

Zacchaeus,

This article from Reasons.org, addresses, from an OEC perspective, a lot of the issues you brought up.

B. W. wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:...Thanks for the explanation. I shall consider it but I have never thought of it this way. I've never thought Genesis chapter 2 tells us what all happened in the 6th day. I've always thought it just explains a little more about God creating Adam and Eve and then placing them in the garden of Eden,it seems speculative to know how long it took God to place Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. I guess it could have been right after however it does not say,it could have been after the 6th day. Plus we have the "and the evening and the morning"problem also.

Now when I think about science and the Big Bang Theory the bible seems to describe not only the Big Bang but both the 1st and 2nd laws of Thermodynamics too, still for some reason when I read Genesis I'm not sure how it would fit into it, but I like Hugh Ross and highly respect his knowledge of science and I loved it when he defeated atheist scientist Victor Stingor in the debate they had.Hugh Ross had Stingor bringing up unsubstantiated scientific ideas trying to make it substantiated science. I really believe had Hugh Ross came to the Lord with the Gap Theory?

The theory of Evolution would have been defeated long ago and Hugh Ross rejects evolution too. I wonder if some knowledgable Gap Theorists could change Hugh Ross's mind to accept the Gap Theory? I doubt it. There were some Gap Theorists joking about several of them going to Ross to try to convince him to change his mind,but I said I doubt it would change his mind,but its worth a try.

All creation account theories are theories. The Gap was long held in vogue. Clarence Larken chartered it out during its heyday of acceptance. Then there is the YEC and OEC theories.

The main point of the Creation account is that God created, period. With that we can all agree.

Like Rick pointed out, in ancient Hebrew, Yom, was used to denote time several ways. God created during His creation Day time frame, not ours. His ways are not our ways and his time is not our time. God acts in our time as well as outside of it. God is timeless, eternal. Since he is, his sense of time contains that part of himself.

It was not until the 4th Creation day that there was ever a 24 hour earth day created. Our time is not his. We cannot demand that he adhere to our timetable as he knows when best to act and answer our prayers.

Why do we demand that God must be YEC or else? I don't know?

After looking into his these many years as a Christian, first a YEC, then thought of GAP, then after careful study of the Hebrew text in Genesis and grammar, word, meanings and symbols, and logic I am OEC for the fact that it does not matter how old or young the earth is, just that God made it all, and in that, I am content.

What caught my attention to OEC on a progression scale was coming to understand how the Hebrew's thought through a problem to solve it. They allowed free flowing exchange of ideas and from these one found truth. One reason for my own OEC position is that God's time is not ours. No one can measure his days. The idiom expression, one day to God is as a thousand years and a thousandth year is as one day, gives clue to this found in 2 Pet 3:8.

Add to this that His creation Days are not the same time duration is found during the 4th day of creation when earth time was clearly established. God's narrative of creation uses his time zone, not ours. Another thing that struck me is the use of backtracking in ancient text writers employed. Gen 2:4 shows this clearly.

Gen chapter one makes it clear it was on God's sixth day of creation he made human beings and ends in Gen 1:31 declaring all was good by the end of the sixth day, so good in fact God rested on the seventh creation era. Chapter two backtracks and then adds more details on the Sixth creation day era of time giving details. No other time could Genesis chapter two happen especially if it it was really a 24 hour day.

If this was merely a 24 hour earth day, then a lot happened. Way too much to be possible. If it is the case of a earth day period of 24 hours, then Adam and Eve lost paradise within a 48 hour period. That is a pretty hectic schedule. Now if God's creation days are based on his own eternal time, then His 6th creation day lasted many-many earth 24 hour periods, long enough for Adam and Eve to carry out the task of the Garden God had them do. Then God declares it is good and moves into His own next creation day - a day of rest.

During that day, it is picked up in Genesis chapter 3. Adam and Eve were not working. Must have been resting when the serpent came and they fell away from God and removed from Eden. The earth day seventh day commentates our resting in God, his word, his provision, and our falling away from this, and our regaining entering his rest through what Jesus Christ did for us by Grace.

In all appearances, we are still living in God's seventh day Rest period so we can honor it by taking one day out of the week to recall what happened and how our reconciliation. This day is not Saturday or one particular solar calendar day but rather under the grace of the NT it is any day we deem to take.

OEC progression allows for God to be God, the GAP as well does so too to act in any manner for however long he wants his creation days to be. How long they are is only known to him and in that, I am content and humbled.

The logic of the ancient Hebrew language does not suggest God's creation's days are equal to a 24 hour earth day. God's evening, morning, and sundown is quite different than our earth day. God lives in Heaven's dimension and time, not ours.

I recall how a Messianic Jewish Rabbi once asked me, "You think Adam lived 930 years total or would that rather be after the fall. After all God did say, in the day you eat - you will die/die!"

I think that one comment turned me to realize OEC is at least humble enough to say, "God, however long or short your creations days were does not matter - only you do - You created it all, amen."
-
-
-

Thanks B.W for the explanation. You should know that I accept that "yom" can mean a long indefinite amount of time,I even used Genesis 2:4 to explain why. However I do have a few issues with some of your views,I'm not saying you're wrong but I just don't think I have good enough reasons to accept some of your views.I'll try to explain why. You say there was not a 24 day until the 4th day however I do not understand how you can say this because of Genesis 1:1 now I don't know how you interpret it but I believe that we cannot know when "In the beginning" was and when we think of God being eternal we must consider that even science could have it wrong,eventhoughI'm not saying they are wrong,what we do know based on what the Universe reveals is the the Universe and earth are not 6000 years old. But then in Genesis 1:1 it says God created the heaven and the earth and this means God created the vast universe and everything in it out of nothing,but this includes the entire Universe including the planets,moons,sun,stars,etc. Now I think you agree with this yet when you say there was no 24 hour day before the fourth day I don't see how you can say that. The earth is spinning in its orbit in verse 2 and the sun was already there and we know from Isaiah 45:18 that God did not originally create the earth without form and void,which means empty and waste,he created it to inhabited from the beginning whenever that was. Obviously there was no sunlight shining on the earth until day 4 however the sun was already there regardless if the sun-light was hitting the earth. And in the 4th day God did not create the sun or stars then,again they had already been created out of nothing in verse 1,yet something happened because between verse 2 whenever that was and the 4th day the light is not hitting the earth,this does not mean it is not there. The hebrew word "asah" tells us that God did work on the heavens,the sun,moon and even the stars I would say he caused the sun to shine on the earth again on day 4 and at night could see the stars after day 4.This means there was a 24 hour day before the 4th day.

Also how doyou know Genesis chapter 2 is referring to all that happened on the 6th day? I guess it could be interpreted like that however I'm not sure that I could accept it based on how it could have been just giving alittlemore detail about God creating Adam and Eve,the garden of Eden and placing thejm in the garden.I don't see how you can say this applies to day 6 which means it was not a 24 hour day even when I acknowledge that "yom" can be an indefinate amount of time,longer than a 24 hour normal day. when we read Genesis 1 about the 6 days it implies a normal day and based on what it says God could have done everything in a day. I'm not against stretching the days out to be long periods of time if there is a reason and we can tell when "yom"means an indefinite amount of time based on what it says like in Genesis 2:4. I do not have a bias,i'm simply trying to show why should we believe the days need to be stretched out,they can be,but the quesion is,should they? Plus just based on the fact of Genesis 1:1 we cannot know how long "in the beginning" was so based on this we do not have to stretch out the days to have an old earth,the bible already reveals it.
I believe the logic of the English translation implies a normal day to english speaking people from God.I don't like changing God's word like for instance you know Gap Theorist have shown based on hebrew that "was" in Genesis 1:2 can be translated " became" however even if it can,it is not necessary to see the Gap and some Gap Theorists don't even bring it up because of the warning in Revelation about adding or taking away from God's word.It is a slippery slope that can mess us up and once you start changing things then how can we trust salvation,grace,etc.

It seems to me toward the end of your explanation for the Day age interpretation that you believe it is the most true interpretation,and you choose to believe it,but think that we cannot really know the truth of it. While I do believe there are many things we may not fully understand until we get to heaven I don't like to think we can't know which interpretation is the most truthful according to scripture and our human knowledge at this time. I think we can but we must let go of our biases and honestly study them out,it could be possible we all have part of the truth and yet we can't yet see it because of our biases but perhaps we could blend the truth all interpretations have together to have a much better understanding.

I do believe young earthers have some of the truth,Day agers and Gap theorists,etc but we we let our biases interfere and remain more divided over our interpretation than is needed.Why can't we instead look at these discussions as finding common ground amongst the different interpretations? I don't mean to just agree with everything either but to just come together discuss the different views and find the things we can agree on and the things we can reject in a honest mutual respect way to find the truth about creation from God's word.

Rick-dude, I get that, and I agree it means 'food'. What did God give them for food? Meat wasn't a food source back then... And for the same reason kur explained when Moses wrote God certainly didn't restrict is own experience, intlect, or understanding... They would of know what meat was and ate it for food in Moses time, which makes my point seem even more evident in making the distinction, that the food (meat) given by God was herb, seed, and fruit. The plain text seems accurately so, corresponding with the fact death, no death hath entered in yet. The garden and everything in it was perfect. You can't assume the text for what God doesn't say, that is reading into the text.

zacchaeus wrote:Again, not flustered... I'm settled rick, ACB, maybe my text isn't conveying my demeanor very well. Acb how can you say I'm not the loner here lol. Weird. Rick, I've studied your post, sat under, and held the same belief for years- just as when you knew I use to be a conditionalist, yet now I believe in eternal salvation. So yes, I have the right and luxury to disagree... Unless it's you that don't understand yec. And ACB I don't find it as important as you deem above, not in regards to believing the truth of Gods word, not in regards to salvation, nor in a friendship between us all. It's interesting, its intriguing, those craving meet may want to know. But that's it.

I want to know why you believe YEc is the correct interpretation. I mean you've asked me many questions and I have answered you biblically,yet you seem to ignore how I'm using scripture to answer you,yet you don't really do it. It seems you're argument is YEC is true,I believe and I'm settled and will not be convinced other wise even by scripture.I want to know how you can claim there was no death on the earth before Adam and Eve when mass exctinctions have happened many times in the earth's history and we even have hominids that have been found and they are not human,so it makes no difference if you do believe the earth is young,since we know these are not humans,you cannot make them descendants from Adam and Eve and try to make them fit between Adam and Eve and Noah's flood. Do you think these hominids that have not been found are fake and not real?
Even Evolutionists know they are not humans so I don't see how you could think they are fake,evolutionists would have loved for them to be humans,but they are'nt. These were real beings that lived and died at one time.Now perhaps you do not know this much about what YEC's claim about these hominids,but this is a legit question because a pre-Adamite race seems to me to be the best answer over the other creation interpretations and even what secular science says about and secular scientists are looking at them from an evolution perspective too.
i don't know if you know about William Buckland but I brought him up before and he was a Christian who was a geologist/Paleontologist who discovered the very first dinosaur and this was before the theory of Evolution became so popular but from examining the fecal matter of the fossilized gut of dinosaurs he knew the former world was a dangerous place to live which is why he came up with the nick-name "Satan's creatures" for dinosaurs before they were even called dinosaurs,he actually thought they were giant lizards,he became Oxford's very first Geology Professor in 1818 long before 1859 when Charles Darwin's " On the origin of species" was published in 1859. WilliamBuckland helped to discover the earth is older than 6000 years old and believed it and taught it yet this evidence was hijacked away by evolution and it needs to be taken back and the truth taught just like William Buckland was teaching about a former world that existed at Oxford in 1818.I bet you think Christians thought up an old earth to accomodate evolution science to make the bible fit the evidence because YEC's say this,which is rewriting true history.

William Buckland.
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjec ... irst.shtml

zacchaeus wrote:Rick-dude, I get that, and I agree it means 'food'. What did God give them for food? Meat wasn't a food source back then... And for the same reason kur explained when Moses wrote God certainly didn't restrict is own experience, intlect, or understanding... They would of know what meat was and ate it for food in Moses time, which makes my point seem even more evident in making the distinction, that the food (meat) given by God was herb, seed, and fruit. The plain text seems accurately so, corresponding with the fact death, no death hath entered in yet. The garden and everything in it was perfect. You can't assume the text for what God doesn't say, that is reading into the text.

Zacchaeus,

Are you talking about no death in the garden of Eden? Because if you are, I agree with you.

abelcainsbrother wrote:....Thanks B.W for the explanation. You should know that I accept that "yom" can mean a long indefinite amount of time,I even used Genesis 2:4 to explain why. However I do have a few issues with some of your views,I'm not saying you're wrong but I just don't think I have good enough reasons to accept some of your views.

I'll try to explain why. You say there was not a 24 day until the 4th day however I do not understand how you can say this because of Genesis 1:1 now I don't know how you interpret it but I believe that we cannot know when "In the beginning" was and when we think of God being eternal we must consider that even science could have it wrong,even though I'm not saying they are wrong,what we do know based on what the Universe reveals is the the Universe and earth are not 6000 years old.

But then in Genesis 1:1 it says God created the heaven and the earth and this means God created the vast universe and everything in it out of nothing,but this includes the entire Universe including the planets,moons,sun,stars,etc. Now I think you agree with this yet when you say there was no 24 hour day before the fourth day I don't see how you can say that. The earth is spinning in its orbit in verse 2 and the sun was already there and we know from Isaiah 45:18 that God did not originally create the earth without form and void,which means empty and waste,he created it to inhabited from the beginning whenever that was.

Obviously there was no sunlight shining on the earth until day 4 however the sun was already there regardless if the sun-light was hitting the earth. And in the 4th day God did not create the sun or stars then,again they had already been created out of nothing in verse 1,yet something happened because between verse 2 whenever that was and the 4th day the light is not hitting the earth,this does not mean it is not there. The hebrew word "asah" tells us that God did work on the heavens,the sun,moon and even the stars I would say he caused the sun to shine on the earth again on day 4 and at night could see the stars after day 4.This means there was a 24 hour day before the 4th day.

This is why I like the old Hebraic method of study and logic use. We can actually discuss things as hypotheses and learn from each other. Let be back up to the fourth creation day, it was on that Creation day God fashioned the sun and moon and stars for telling of earth time. That is how many interpret all God's seven creation days as 24 hour periods of earth time. I found instead that the seven creations days, all of them, are based upon God's time, not our earth day time. That was what I was saying. Hope this clears this up for you and others. God's Creation time was before the earth day cycle was ever made, therefore, however long his Creation days are are actually only known to God and that 'is' my point.

abelcainsbrother wrote:Also how do you know Genesis chapter 2 is referring to all that happened on the 6th day?

I guess it could be interpreted like that however I'm not sure that I could accept it based on how it could have been just giving a little more detail about God creating Adam and Eve,the garden of Eden and placing the jm in the garden.I don't see how you can say this applies to day 6 which means it was not a 24 hour day even when I acknowledge that "yom" can be an indefinite amount of time, longer than a 24 hour normal day.

When we read Genesis 1 about the 6 days it implies a normal day and based on what it says God could have done everything in a day. I'm not against stretching the days out to be long periods of time if there is a reason and we can tell when "yom"means an indefinite amount of time based on what it says like in Genesis 2:4. I do not have a bias,i'm simply trying to show why should we believe the days need to be stretched out,they can be,but the quesion is,should they? Plus just based on the fact of Genesis 1:1 we cannot know how long "in the beginning" was so based on this we do not have to stretch out the days to have an old earth,the bible already reveals it.

I believe the logic of the English translation implies a normal day to english speaking people from God.I don't like changing God's word like for instance you know Gap Theorist have shown based on hebrew that "was" in Genesis 1:2 can be translated " became" however even if it can,it is not necessary to see the Gap and some Gap Theorists don't even bring it up because of the warning in Revelation about adding or taking away from God's word.It is a slippery slope that can mess us up and once you start changing things then how can we trust salvation,grace,etc.

It seems to me toward the end of your explanation for the Day age interpretation that you believe it is the most true interpretation,and you choose to believe it,but think that we cannot really know the truth of it. While I do believe there are many things we may not fully understand until we get to heaven I don't like to think we can't know which interpretation is the most truthful according to scripture and our human knowledge at this time. I think we can but we must let go of our biases and honestly study them out,it could be possible we all have part of the truth and yet we can't yet see it because of our biases but perhaps we could blend the truth all interpretations have together to have a much better understanding.

I do believe young earthers have some of the truth,Day agers and Gap theorists,etc but we we let our biases interfere and remain more divided over our interpretation than is needed.Why can't we instead look at these discussions as finding common ground amongst the different interpretations? I don't mean to just agree with everything either but to just come together discuss the different views and find the things we can agree on and the things we can reject in a honest mutual respect way to find the truth about creation from God's word.

Okay back to God's sixth creation day. I am saying it lasted for an indefinite period of earth day time. Chapter two, according to the writing style of ancient people, it was common to use a flashback approach to explain history of events. One tells of the basic event, then stops, and recounts in a later part of the text the details, etc and etc.

Genesis chapter two, refers to the to God's 6th day creation. It is about the creation of man and woman mentioned in Gen 1:26-27 on day six of God's creation timetable. Genesis 1:31 mentions God saying everything was really functionally good and the Seventh Creation Day of God came next where God rest from creating. In His rest, God takes the time to enjoy and bless and observe and tinker with creation - for a lack of a better word for God resting to mean. God never sleeps or slumbers and he is always working just as the bible mentions. So...

Gen 2:4-26 concerns the sixth creation era involving man and women as well as describing their duties of tending and keeping the earth, naming animals, etc and etc, and obeying God by faith i.e. trust. The Sixth creation era ends and everything was very good - functioning perfectly. The fall of man does not appear to have happened on the sixth creation era for if that was the case then all would not have been very good - functioning perfectly. Therefore the only era of time that Genesis 2:4-26 could have happened and be about is the sixth day of God's Creation timetable. Also note that Adam and Eve were called to work and were working in Genesis chapter two, thus, no Sabbath day had been been made until Gen 2:1-3.

Next, my point was directed more at the YEC position that bases creation time as a 24 hour earth day cycle. If that is true, which I do not think it is, then a lot happened on that day, to numerous to consider logical. That was my point and the point of the humor I used. You see, many years ago, after taking the time to use the study books, Hebrew grammar/dictionaries, study of Hebrew language, I interpreted he Genesis' creation account into English, I noticed the inconsistency of YEC point of view.

All I can do, is simply point out the details and let the Lord himself speak to people about them so they reach his or her own conclusions. I discovered by doing this, we can all simply agree God created all creation and in that we can rejoice and stop useless arguments.

Look at these verses:

1Co 11:18, 19 NKJV, "For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you."

Notice what the underline part says...

Then read Matthew 5:2-10 and verses 8 and 9 and see how such are proved.

My main point is, we need to stop trying to be right so our pride to be important stops hiding behind the pretext that our argument pleases Jesus in order to justify our pride is okay. God's Creation Days are as long or short according to God, not us. Let us rejoice that He created period and go on doing his will on earth as it is in Heaven, Amen.
-
-
-

"Okay back to God's sixth creation day. I am saying it lasted for an indefinite period of earth day time. Chapter two, according to the writing style of ancient people, it was common to use a flashback approach to explain history of events. One tells of the basic event, then stops, and recounts in a later part of the text the details, etc and etc.

That is IF the two accounts are talking about the very same events. It MIGHT be that the first story tells of the creation of mankind while the second story subsequently focuses on what happens in THE GARDEN, and also the lineage of God's family through Christ, which would have begun with the creation of Adam. Remember, the story is told LONG after the flood of Noah, per Moses. Has the Church perhaps been gluing the two different accounts together, when in fact, they are largely disconnected? And Eve, through her subsequent ancestors related to Noah's family, would indeed have been the "Mother of all living," but not the necessarily the mother of ALL humans from the very beginning.

BTW, I'm not convinced of the above possibility, but it IS an intriguing one.

Explored more fully here: http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible ... -research/