Finally Picked a creation stance.

[EssentialSacrifice]

Genesis 1 makes at least twenty-six statements about the creation of the universe and the development of life on Earth that can be tested against current scientific understanding. The twenty-six statements are listed below in the order in which they appear. After each statement is a brief comment about the current state of science related to each of these statements.

[Gen. 1:1] In the beginning God created heaven and earth.1
The ancient Hebrew language had only about 3,000 words and did not have a word for ‘universe’ so it used the phrase ‘heaven and earth’ instead. Big bang cosmology says the universe had a definite beginning from nothing. In other words, it came about through an act of creation. Science can’t tell us if the cause of the creation of the universe was conscious (God) or unconscious (super-nature).

[Gen. 1:2] The earth was without form …
Just after the creation of the universe, there were none of the cosmic structures we see today. There was no Earth just after the big bang.
… and empty, …
There was no matter at this time.
… with darkness on the face of the depths, …
Light was trapped by free electrons in the universe at this time.
… but God’s spirit moved on the water’s surface.
Current scientific theory says that something called ‘inflation’ happened that is currently not understood in terms of the laws of physics. It was a one-time event, consistent with what Christians call a miracle or divine intervention. It is interesting that both physics and the Bible say that something unique happened at this point in the development of our world.

[Gen. 1:3] God said, ‘There shall be light,’ and light came into existence.
Up until this point photons of light have been trapped by repeated collisions with free electrons. Once the universe is cool enough to allow electrons to combine with atomic nuclei to form neutral atoms, photons become free to roam the universe.

[Gen. 1:4] God divided between the light and the darkness.
The Bible is saying that ‘darkness’ is a thing in and of itself. Modern astrophysics now agrees that darkness is more than just shadows or the absence of light. Modern physics is struggling to understand this with concepts such as dark matter and dark energy.

[Gen. 1:6] God said, ‘There shall be a sky in the middle of the water, and it shall divide between water and water.’
There is evidence that our universe may have been formed by the interplay of two fluids — something called quarks and what we think of as ‘empty’ space. For example, the December 2005 issue of Scientific American includes an article, “An Echo of Black Holes,” by Theodore A. Jacobson and Renaud Parentani, that hypothesized that spacetime is in some ways like a material fluid. Another article from the May 2006 issue, “The First Few Microseconds” by Michael Riordan and William A. Zajc, explains how the “quark soup” that came into existence at this stage of the universe acted like a perfect fluid.
In regard to Gen. 1:6, Maimonides explains, “It has been declared by our Sages that the portion above the firmament is only water in name, not in reality … the account of the firmament, with that which is above it and is called water, is as you see, of a very mysterious character.” The problem once again is that ancient Hebrew had a relatively small number of words. Because it had no word for ‘fluid,’ the word ‘water’ was used instead. This did not prevent ancient and medieval scholars of the ancient Hebrew from gaining important scientific insights by carefully reading Genesis. Refer to Maimonides’ The Guide for the Perplexed, Chapter XXX for a truly thought-provoking and scientifically-compatible explanation of this passage.

[Gen. 1:7-8] God [thus] made the sky, and it separated the water below the sky from the water above the sky. It remained that way. God named the sky ‘Heaven.’
Galaxies comprised of stars, including the Sun, were formed.

[Gen. 1:9] God said, ‘The waters under the heaven shall be gathered to one place, and dry land shall be seen.’
The Earth was formed and continents appeared through the process of plate tectonics.

[Gen. 1:10] God named the dry land ‘Earth,’ and the gatherings of water, He named ‘Seas.’
The oceans formed around the continents.

[Gen. 1:11] God said, ‘The earth shall send forth vegetation.‘
The first life on Earth was vegetation, and it appeared right after the oceans formed.
‘… plants and fruit trees that produce their own kinds of fruits with seeds shall be on the earth.’
Plants with seeds and fruit came later, after the first primitive one-celled vegetation.

[Gen. 1:14] God said, ‘There shall be lights in the heavenly sky to divide between day and night.’
Plants changed the atmosphere of the Earth so that it became transparent.

[Gen. 1:15] ‘They shall be lights in the heavenly sky, to shine on the earth.’
Enough (unscattered) light was eventually able to reach the surface of the Earth to allow the Sun, Moon, and stars to become visible.

[Gen. 1:20] God said, ‘The water shall teem with swarms of living creatures.’
Animal life appeared first in the oceans in an amazing and scientifically unexplained abundance during the Cambrian explosion (also called the ‘biological big bang’).
‘Flying creatures shall fly over the land, on the face of the heavenly sky.’
Insects, including winged insects, appeared next.

[Gen. 1:21] God [thus] created the great sea monsters, …
The Hebrew words “gadolim taninim” translated here as “great sea monsters” has also been translated as whales, crocodiles, serpents, and dragons. Without doubt the word “gadolim” means “great” or “large,” but over the centuries, people translated the difficult word “taninim” in terms of their own experience. That’s why the King James Bible, translated by a person from a sea-faring nation, translated it as “whales.” In his book, The Science of God, Dr. Gerald Schroeder argues that the correct translation of the ancient Hebrew word “taninim” is “reptiles.” Therefore this passage could be translated as, “So God created the great reptiles.” Those would be the dinosaurs.
… along with every particular species of living thing that crawls, with which the waters teem, …
New forms of animals appeared, that developed the ability to crawl and walk on land.
… and every particular species of winged flying creature.
Winged dinosaurs and eventually birds appear.

[Gen. 1:22] God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful and become many, and fill the waters of the sea.’
Millions of species of animal life eventually appear.
‘Let the flying creatures multiply on the land.’
A number of species of animals develop the ability to fly in different ways, including bats, which are flying mammals.

[Gen. 1:24] God said, ‘The earth shall bring forth particular species of living creatures, particular species of livestock, land animals, and beasts of the earth.’
Mammals appear which eventually become of special interest and use to humans.

[Gen. 1:26] God said, ‘Let us make man in our image and likeness.’
The physical ancestors of humans appear in the form of smart animals (hominids).
[Gen. 1:27] God [thus] created man with His image. In the image of God, He created him, …
At some point, humans acquired the mysterious quality of consciousness.

[Gen. 1:28] God said to them, ‘Be fertile and become many. Fill the land and conquer it. Dominate the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every beast that walks the land.

Humans come to dominate the Earth in ways no other life form has.
First, it is important to note that no statement in Genesis 1 that could be related to science has been deliberately left out of the list. In other words, nothing contrary to science has been dishonestly excluded. Only the references to the six days in which these things occurred have been left out, because this is the subject of another essay. Next, it is important to understand that each of these statements is, as indicated above, entirely compatible with our current understanding of the origins and development of the universe. And, lastly, the steps in the development of our universe as listed in Genesis are in the correct scientific order.

Excerpt from sixdayscience acrticle, http://sixdayscience.com/genesis-1-modern-science/

So would this be another OEC/YEC/GAP theory rival ? I have never thought of the other theories until B.W. actually explained what the GAP theory is. This is an excerpt from an article that SoCal gave us in May(?) I think and even though i never really thought about how all this happened on a timing basis, I knew it had to work out some way because history has shown us the past geologically and, we're here today ... sooo, somehow it had to happen, and I never really cared, as I just knew it did happen the way it has, as it has shown us so far by evidence we've dug up..

God always finds His way and it almost always confounds us... look at Christ telling the people of His day he would tear down the temple and rebuild it in 3 days.... they thought he was insane... but, as history shows, God's flawless timing and impeccable ability to perform what he says is all logically and perfectly performed with the death and Resurrection of His only begotten Son, within 3 days to rebuild His earthly temple.... this is how i always knew there was an answer, but, not knowing the answer was not a problem... I just figured I'd have to ask once I got there, if it wasn't revealed to me before I went home. I certainly didn't think it would but perhaps, as is written in this article, it has.

Does this answer the 3 theory conundrum or just make it more murky ? It makes great sense to me that once again God had his way and we, 3000 years ago and again scientifically today, have figured it out...

[abelcainsbrother]

Genesis 1 makes at least twenty-six statements about the creation of the universe and the development of life on Earth that can be tested against current scientific understanding. The twenty-six statements are listed below in the order in which they appear. After each statement is a brief comment about the current state of science related to each of these statements.

[Gen. 1:1] In the beginning God created heaven and earth.1
The ancient Hebrew language had only about 3,000 words and did not have a word for ‘universe’ so it used the phrase ‘heaven and earth’ instead. Big bang cosmology says the universe had a definite beginning from nothing. In other words, it came about through an act of creation. Science can’t tell us if the cause of the creation of the universe was conscious (God) or unconscious (super-nature).

[Gen. 1:2] The earth was without form …
Just after the creation of the universe, there were none of the cosmic structures we see today. There was no Earth just after the big bang.
… and empty, …
There was no matter at this time.
… with darkness on the face of the depths, …
Light was trapped by free electrons in the universe at this time.
… but God’s spirit moved on the water’s surface.
Current scientific theory says that something called ‘inflation’ happened that is currently not understood in terms of the laws of physics. It was a one-time event, consistent with what Christians call a miracle or divine intervention. It is interesting that both physics and the Bible say that something unique happened at this point in the development of our world.

[Gen. 1:3] God said, ‘There shall be light,’ and light came into existence.
Up until this point photons of light have been trapped by repeated collisions with free electrons. Once the universe is cool enough to allow electrons to combine with atomic nuclei to form neutral atoms, photons become free to roam the universe.

[Gen. 1:4] God divided between the light and the darkness.
The Bible is saying that ‘darkness’ is a thing in and of itself. Modern astrophysics now agrees that darkness is more than just shadows or the absence of light. Modern physics is struggling to understand this with concepts such as dark matter and dark energy.

[Gen. 1:6] God said, ‘There shall be a sky in the middle of the water, and it shall divide between water and water.’
There is evidence that our universe may have been formed by the interplay of two fluids — something called quarks and what we think of as ‘empty’ space. For example, the December 2005 issue of Scientific American includes an article, “An Echo of Black Holes,” by Theodore A. Jacobson and Renaud Parentani, that hypothesized that spacetime is in some ways like a material fluid. Another article from the May 2006 issue, “The First Few Microseconds” by Michael Riordan and William A. Zajc, explains how the “quark soup” that came into existence at this stage of the universe acted like a perfect fluid.
In regard to Gen. 1:6, Maimonides explains, “It has been declared by our Sages that the portion above the firmament is only water in name, not in reality … the account of the firmament, with that which is above it and is called water, is as you see, of a very mysterious character.” The problem once again is that ancient Hebrew had a relatively small number of words. Because it had no word for ‘fluid,’ the word ‘water’ was used instead. This did not prevent ancient and medieval scholars of the ancient Hebrew from gaining important scientific insights by carefully reading Genesis. Refer to Maimonides’ The Guide for the Perplexed, Chapter XXX for a truly thought-provoking and scientifically-compatible explanation of this passage.

[Gen. 1:7-8] God [thus] made the sky, and it separated the water below the sky from the water above the sky. It remained that way. God named the sky ‘Heaven.’
Galaxies comprised of stars, including the Sun, were formed.

[Gen. 1:9] God said, ‘The waters under the heaven shall be gathered to one place, and dry land shall be seen.’
The Earth was formed and continents appeared through the process of plate tectonics.

[Gen. 1:10] God named the dry land ‘Earth,’ and the gatherings of water, He named ‘Seas.’
The oceans formed around the continents.

[Gen. 1:11] God said, ‘The earth shall send forth vegetation.‘
The first life on Earth was vegetation, and it appeared right after the oceans formed.
‘… plants and fruit trees that produce their own kinds of fruits with seeds shall be on the earth.’
Plants with seeds and fruit came later, after the first primitive one-celled vegetation.

[Gen. 1:14] God said, ‘There shall be lights in the heavenly sky to divide between day and night.’
Plants changed the atmosphere of the Earth so that it became transparent.

[Gen. 1:15] ‘They shall be lights in the heavenly sky, to shine on the earth.’
Enough (unscattered) light was eventually able to reach the surface of the Earth to allow the Sun, Moon, and stars to become visible.

[Gen. 1:20] God said, ‘The water shall teem with swarms of living creatures.’
Animal life appeared first in the oceans in an amazing and scientifically unexplained abundance during the Cambrian explosion (also called the ‘biological big bang’).
‘Flying creatures shall fly over the land, on the face of the heavenly sky.’
Insects, including winged insects, appeared next.

[Gen. 1:21] God [thus] created the great sea monsters, …
The Hebrew words “gadolim taninim” translated here as “great sea monsters” has also been translated as whales, crocodiles, serpents, and dragons. Without doubt the word “gadolim” means “great” or “large,” but over the centuries, people translated the difficult word “taninim” in terms of their own experience. That’s why the King James Bible, translated by a person from a sea-faring nation, translated it as “whales.” In his book, The Science of God, Dr. Gerald Schroeder argues that the correct translation of the ancient Hebrew word “taninim” is “reptiles.” Therefore this passage could be translated as, “So God created the great reptiles.” Those would be the dinosaurs.
… along with every particular species of living thing that crawls, with which the waters teem, …
New forms of animals appeared, that developed the ability to crawl and walk on land.
… and every particular species of winged flying creature.
Winged dinosaurs and eventually birds appear.

[Gen. 1:22] God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful and become many, and fill the waters of the sea.’
Millions of species of animal life eventually appear.
‘Let the flying creatures multiply on the land.’
A number of species of animals develop the ability to fly in different ways, including bats, which are flying mammals.

[Gen. 1:24] God said, ‘The earth shall bring forth particular species of living creatures, particular species of livestock, land animals, and beasts of the earth.’
Mammals appear which eventually become of special interest and use to humans.

[Gen. 1:26] God said, ‘Let us make man in our image and likeness.’
The physical ancestors of humans appear in the form of smart animals (hominids).
[Gen. 1:27] God [thus] created man with His image. In the image of God, He created him, …
At some point, humans acquired the mysterious quality of consciousness.

[Gen. 1:28] God said to them, ‘Be fertile and become many. Fill the land and conquer it. Dominate the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every beast that walks the land.

Humans come to dominate the Earth in ways no other life form has.
First, it is important to note that no statement in Genesis 1 that could be related to science has been deliberately left out of the list. In other words, nothing contrary to science has been dishonestly excluded. Only the references to the six days in which these things occurred have been left out, because this is the subject of another essay. Next, it is important to understand that each of these statements is, as indicated above, entirely compatible with our current understanding of the origins and development of the universe. And, lastly, the steps in the development of our universe as listed in Genesis are in the correct scientific order.

Excerpt from sixdayscience acrticle, http://sixdayscience.com/genesis-1-modern-science/

So would this be another OEC/YEC/GAP theory rival ? I have never thought of the other theories until B.W. actually explained what the GAP theory is. This is an excerpt from an article that SoCal gave us in May(?) I think and even though i never really thought about how all this happened on a timing basis, I knew it had to work out some way because history has shown us the past geologically and, we're here today ... sooo, somehow it had to happen, and I never really cared, as I just knew it did happen the way it has, as it has shown us so far by evidence we've dug up..

God always finds His way and it almost always confounds us... look at Christ telling the people of His day he would tear down the temple and rebuild it in 3 days.... they thought he was insane... but, as history shows, God's flawless timing and impeccable ability to perform what he says is all logically and perfectly performed with the death and Resurrection of His only begotten Son, within 3 days to rebuild His earthly temple.... this is how i always knew there was an answer, but, not knowing the answer was not a problem... I just figured I'd have to ask once I got there, if it wasn't revealed to me before I went home. I certainly didn't think it would but perhaps, as is written in this article, it has.

Does this answer the 3 theory conundrum or just make it more murky ? It makes great sense to me that once again God had his way and we, 3000 years ago and again scientifically today, have figured it out...

I do think this was interesting.And it should be considered with the other theories but my first take is it is making science fit into to what the bible says when it really does not line up with what the verses say. Like for instance, Genesis 1:2 he claims the earth had not been created yet when it has already we created,it was created In the beginning whenever that was.

[RickD]

ES,

From a cursory reading of what you posted, it looks like it fits somewhere in the extremely wide range of beliefs in Theistic Evolution.

This is a dead giveaway that it's TE in some form.

The physical ancestors of humans appear in the form of smart animals (hominids).
[Gen. 1:27] God [thus] created man with His image. In the image of God, He created him, …
At some point, humans acquired the mysterious quality of consciousness.

[EssentialSacrifice]

What's TE ?

[RickD]

What's TE ?

Theistic Evolution

[abelcainsbrother]

What's TE ?

TE is short for Theistic evolution and I agree with Rick it is some form of theistic evolution.Jac brought up something awhile back that I agree with.I don't know if I can explain it like he did but it goes something like this science has ignored philosophy for probably hundreds of years and went in a naturalistic direction and this was a mistake because it has actually hampered science because everything is looked from this perspective and so there is a lot of bad science because of it and that there is so much science has missed out on,there are all kinds of things science would have discovered had it not went in the direction it did.But I actually believe a lot of science cannot and will not ever be proven or demonstrated because the science we have today is all based on naturalism and evolution.And for hundreds of yearrs despite all of the naturalism and evolution rhetoric,it has never been proven or demonstrated both naturalism and evolution even though it is believed and taught to be the way it is in science and we see the influence today.

[EssentialSacrifice]

What's TE ?

Yeah, ok... I don't feel dumb... So, when I first came on site, I read the attributes you wished to reveal and the one for a creation stance was unfamiliar to me. I went to google and looked at Theistic and thought that was pretty close... but there are, I suspect different nuances of my belief.. ( by the way, not having almost anything to do with actual belief in God, Jesus HS...) is that that has been influenced by geological findings and better,newer scientific revelations that constantly reveal another act of God. (Science will always play catch-up to the works of God. It is fun though to read about what new has been learned and knowing we've put a name to an act that God created ages ago...) but now so many billions of years later actually reveal that the ones in the bible examples quoted above and here http://sixdayscience.com/2015/05/11/my-testimony used pretty scientific terms for their day. Certainly, with the advent of all the science that has transpired since the first days of the bible, the "better definition", more deeply inspected act of God that has now been again and again named by us for a further, better definition for us but still lacking so far behind the mind of God...

So maybe I'm more a combination of Theist and Day/Age ... i have to read some more but at some point I'll take any further differences between them from you guys. BW gave me a hand with GAP, and now I'm looking at all possibilities, (progressive ?) but will find it hard to believe, now, knowing the circumstances in definition of these 3 defined creation types, there will neither be any one, that may be complete in my definition, but also the possibility of cross over from one to the next...

Bottom line is, I always knew and know there is a reason for the how's and the when's and where's ... it's not all that important in comparison to what is real important, the real life of Jesus... just more man's definition of God's original plan.

[RickD]

ES,

Just say you're a YEC, with Day-Age/PC, leanings but you come from a TE background.

That way, you can be a good Catholic boy, and not ruffle any feathers.

[neo-x]

What's TE ?

Yeah, ok... I don't feel dumb... So, when I first came on site, I read the attributes you wished to reveal and the one for a creation stance was unfamiliar to me. I went to google and looked at Theistic and thought that was pretty close... but there are, I suspect different nuances of my belief.. ( by the way, not having almost anything to do with actual belief in God, Jesus HS...) is that that has been influenced by geological findings and better,newer scientific revelations that constantly reveal another act of God. (Science will always play catch-up to the works of God. It is fun though to read about what new has been learned and knowing we've put a name to an at that God created ages ago...) but now so many billions of years later actually reveal that the ones in the bible examples quoted above and here http://sixdayscience.com/2015/05/11/my-testimony used pretty scientific terms for their day. Certainly, with the advent of all the science that has transpired since the first days of the bible, the "better definition", more deeply inspected act of God that has now been again and again named by us for a further, better definition for us but still lacking so far behind the mind of God...

So maybe I'm more a combination of Theist and Day/Age ... i have to read some more but at some point I'll take any further differences between them from you guys. BW gave me a hand with GAP, and now I'm looking at all possibilities, (progressive ?) but will find it hard to believe, now, knowing the circumstances in definition of these 3 defined creation types, there will neither be any one, that may be complete in my definition, but also the possibility of cross over from one to the next...

Bottom line is, I always knew and know there is a reason for the how's and the when's and where's ... it's not all that important in comparison to what is real important, the real life of Jesus... just more man's definition of God's original plan.

Very nicely said! At the end of the day all of these are beliefs and have really no bearing on anything significant in the kingdom of God.

[EssentialSacrifice]

Types of creationism[edit] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism (I chose site for brevity and completeness of definition)
Several attempts have been made to categorize the different types of creationism, and create a "taxonomy" of creationists.[45][46][47] Creationism (broadly construed) covers a spectrum of beliefs which have been categorized into the general types listed below.

Comparison of major creationist views
Acceptance in the U.S. Humanity Biological species Earth Age of Universe

Young Earth creationism 40%[48] Directly created by God. Directly created by God. Macroevolution does not occur. Less than 10,000 years old. Reshaped by global flood. Less than 10,000 years old, but some hold this view only for our Solar System.

Gap creationism Scientifically accepted age. Reshaped by global flood. Scientifically accepted age.
Progressive creationism 38%[48] Directly created by God, based on primate anatomy. Direct creation + evolution. No single common ancestor. Scientifically accepted age. No global flood. Scientifically accepted age.

Intelligent design Proponents hold various beliefs. (For example, Michael Behe accepts evolution from primates.) Divine intervention at some point in the past, as evidenced by what intelligent-design creationists call "irreducible complexity". Some adherents accept common descent, others not. Some claim the existence of Earth is the result of divine intervention. Scientifically accepted age.

Theistic evolution (evolutionary creationism) Evolution from primates. Evolution from single common ancestor. Scientifically accepted age. No global flood. Scientifically accepted age.

So, tell me, is this listing a fair representation of or a good example of what people are describing when they adhere to any one of these creation theories... ? Seems pretty clear to me if you guys agree ... lots of room for discussion in all camps... if these definitions are agreeable I can reveal my creation stance.

[neo-x]

These are quite agreeable.

[EssentialSacrifice]

Thanks neo... the perfect witness to my creation stance philosophy.

I knew there would be crossover and there is big time. I'm going to simply list out the things I feel from the selected categories and come to an end game of best definition from this work. These will be my supported for theory list from the already advanced theories.

Young Earth creationism: Directly created by God. Now understand, my definition of this is no evolution, no primates involved, simply the pure creative act of making man from the dust... in our case star dust.

Gap creationism Directly created by God, based on primate anatomy. I must admit, the possibility of a creative act from God to a specific hominid (man) is very much in the wheelhouse too. Either way, a creative act of God was involved and we're it.

Intelligent design Divine intervention at some point in the past

Theistic evolution Evolution from single common ancestor

+ all theories that include Scientifically accepted age and no world wide flood.

So, there you have it, using only the material above as reference to my base beliefs... there it is..a YECGAPIDTE. Looks to be perhaps the name of a cactus plant in New Mexico... with graphite shavings... This of course, only covers the barest of minimum of all my thoughts involved in our creation, but it's a good start. I would like a new category to fill in... maybe just lave a blank and I'll fill it in myself.... I'm not undecided, I'm just not sure how to list it with he current choices... Actually, no big deal ... you guys no what it is now regardless.

[RickD]

ES,

You fence sitter!

[Kurieuo]

Did you purposefully leave out a main position ES?

[EssentialSacrifice]

You fence sitter!

It's not fence sitting when you have already your thoughts and are trying to equate them with what others have proposed. My thoughts first, your definitions in creation stance second...

Did you purposefully leave out a main position

I wouldn't say purposefully K, but if I missed a category ... ? Topically categorized as 1. humanity, .2 biological species, 3. Earth and 4. Age of Universe. 1. Directly created by God as either a new species or His infused enlightenment in to a hominid. (His creation, either way) 2. see #1. 3. and 4. scientific accepted age of world, and universe.