Why to NOT take Genesis literally.

[Christodoulos]

The best reason not to take Genesis literally is primarily due to it being unsupported by science.

Now for Christians ,it's important to know that all scientific discovery has a spiritual component.

The earth orbiting the sun ,rather than the other way around is still inspiring and still testifies to God's creative powers.

Genesis was never meant to be a factual account of creation but rather a statement of belief to compete with the other creation stories in the area .. The same kind of beliefs found in various governments stating what they generally believe and advocate.

Like the words of the cons***ution .. Life liberty pursuit of happiness and so on.. blah blah

[tdidymas]

The best reason not to take Genesis literally is primarily due to it being unsupported by science.

Now for Christians ,it's important to know that all scientific discovery has a spiritual component.

The earth orbiting the sun ,rather than the other way around is still inspiring and still testifies to God's creative powers.

Genesis was never meant to be a factual account of creation but rather a statement of belief to compete with the other creation stories in the area .. The same kind of beliefs found in various governments stating what they generally believe and advocate.

Like the words of the cons***ution .. Life liberty pursuit of happiness and so on.. blah blah

Gen 1 was written from an ancient cosmology POV; I haven't checked out all the details yet, but here are 2 articles I found on the subj, and it looks very reasonable, makes lots of sense.
http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/seelypt1.pdf
http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/seelypt2.pdf
It talks about how the ancients thought the sky was a solid ceiling. Very eye-opening.
:)TD

[Christodoulos]

Gen 1 was written from an ancient cosmology POV; I haven't checked out all the details yet, but here are 2 articles I found on the subj, and it looks very reasonable, makes lots of sense.
http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/seelypt1.pdf
http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/seelypt2.pdf
It talks about how the ancients thought the sky was a solid ceiling. Very eye-opening.
:)TD

And that's why it's called the FIRMAment in the bible.

[tdidymas]

And that's why it's called the FIRMAment in the bible.

In all fairness, here is a link to an opposing argument:
https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/cosmology/is-the-raqiya-firmament-a-solid-dome/
:)TD

[alanmolstad]

My own view on the issue is that while Genesis is not a book teaching science, it none the less tells a religious story that works within the teachings of science and evolution.

We don't find evolution taught in the story of Genesis, but then again, we don't find any anti-evolution arguments in the story as well.

So in the end, I maintain that evolution and Genesis are like friendly neighbors, in that each is their own property yet they get along with their neighbor and together form a very nice relationship in the heart of the believer.

[Christodoulos]

In all fairness, here is a link to an opposing argument:
https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/cosmology/is-the-raqiya-firmament-a-solid-dome/
:)TD

answers in genesis is not an opposing argument but a major swindle.

There are no answers in 'Answers in Genesis" all it is ,is a clever attempt to trick the vastly gullible among the fundy crowd.

You can't discuss science with a Genesis literalist without demeaning the Christian Faith.

This was a serious problem, that goes back to the time of Augustine in the 5th. century.He answered the controversy then; but those who exploit the naive for bucks will still find a way to revive the controversy.

Ken Ham has made a huge fortune doing exactly that in his incredibly deceptive museum and hs ridiculous answers in genesis comic book.

[cheachea]

answers in genesis is not an opposing argument but a major swindle.

There are no answers in 'Answers in Genesis" all it is ,is a clever attempt to trick the vastly gullible among the fundy crowd.

You can't discuss science with a Genesis literalist without demeaning the Christian Faith.

This was a serious problem, that goes back to the time of Augustine in the 5th. century.He answered the controversy then; but those who exploit the naive for bucks will still find a way to revive the controversy.

Ken Ham has made a huge fortune doing exactly that in his incredibly deceptive museum and hs ridiculous answers in genesis comic book.




It's a shame that you can't provide any proof of your claims/slander against Ken Ham. How long will you keep this campaign of slander going ?

[Christodoulos]

My own view on the issue is that while Genesis is not a book teaching science, it none the less tells a religious story that works within the teachings of science and evolution.

We don't find evolution taught in the story of Genesis, but then again, we don't find any anti-evolution arguments in the story as well.

So in the end, I maintain that evolution and Genesis are like friendly neighbors, in that each is their own property yet they get along with their neighbor and together form a very nice relationship in the heart of the believer.

you may be on to something. All the more reason to fight the swindlers in the Answersingenesis crowd.

[alanmolstad]

It's a shame that you can't provide any proof of your claims/slander against Ken Ham. How long will you keep this campaign of slander going ?
I attendedan 8-week cl*** taught by Mr Ham.....
It was about as pointless way to spend time as you can get...

But I will never have to people tell me that I dont know the truth about Ham's teachings...cuz i have heard them from Ham himself

[DrDavidT]

The best reason not to take Genesis literally is primarily due to it being unsupported by science.

Now for Christians ,it's important to know that all scientific discovery has a spiritual component.



We do not need science to support creation. It was a one time supernatural event not a natural one.

[alanmolstad]

Evolution is true.

Young Earth Creationism is false.


(Just thought it needed to be said once in a while)

[jude1:3]

Evolution is true.




Macroevolution is a lie.

[alanmolstad]

Macroevolution is a lie.

Young Earth Creationism is a lie...

[jude1:3]

Young Earth Creationism is a lie...



Ok, they're both a lie.

[alanmolstad]

Young Earth Creationism is a dreamed-up idea by people that don't understand the bible...

evolution is a idea that works within the Genesis text.


Thats the difference.
Creationism is false...its a false idea that never was true.

[jude1:3]

*Creationism - the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution.




So You Don't Believe The Bible, but you do believe the lie that is evolution.

[alanmolstad]

Wrong.....

YOUNG EARTH creationism is not in the bible....YEC is a lie .

Evolution works hand in hand with the Genesis story.

[alanmolstad]

science and Evolution work hand in hand with the Genesis story.

What is the first things the Bible says were created?...The answer is that in the beginning God created "the heavens and the earth"
This fits within the teachings of science.

[alanmolstad]

In Young Earth Creationism (YEC), they have to invent a "source-less" light.

But the Bible tells us the source for all the Light talked about on the first day and the forth day...the source is "the heavens"

So there is a source for all the Light.
It's the same source we see today for all the lights we see.
The Bible's source (the heavens) in in complete agreement with Scirnce.

YEC has no source, ....YEC goes against the bible...

[disciple]

Young Earth Creationism is a dreamed-up idea by people that don't understand the bible...

evolution is a idea that works within the Genesis text.


Thats the difference.
Creationism is false...its a false idea that never was true.

So Creationism is false? How about the 4th commandment, false also?

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” Ex. 20:8-11

[alanmolstad]

So Creationism is false? Yes,....

Young Earth Creationism is a dreamed up idea by people who strayed away from the Text and needed ways to force the Text agree with their preconceived ideas of what the Bible "should" have said.

[alanmolstad]

How about the 4th commandment, false also?



The Commandmenets are real because they are really in the Text.

Young Earth creationism is false because it does not actually appear in the text.

Thats the difference....





One is real...the other is fake.

One is in the Bible and you can quote where its appears.
The other is not in the Bible and you cant quote where its at.



So what Im saying is that we need to stick to what the Bible teaches, and get rid of this junk known as Young Earth Creationism.

[disciple]

Yes,....

Young Earth Creationism is a dreamed up idea by people who strayed away from the Text and needed ways to force the Text agree with their preconceived ideas of what the Bible "should" have said.

The forth commandment isn't dreamed up, it has always said what God intended it to say, He created everything in six days.

[alanmolstad]

The forth commandment isn't dreamed up,.

again...the Commandments are real...because they are in the bible....(That's why you can quote them)

Young Earth Creationism is fake...its a dreamed up teaching that is not in the Bible..(Thats why you cant quote a verse that supports it)

[alanmolstad]

Young earth creationism hangs everything on one idea.....the 'sourceless light"


The mixed-up way the YEC teachers read the Bible they have God creating light before he makes the sun....
This is a problem ....

You cant have a light without a source so the YEC teachers have come up with all kinds of different ways to have a light without a source for that light...
and all of this is a dreamed up idea that is not actually taught in the Bible...



what is taught in the Bible?
The answer is that the Bible teaches us that god created the "source' for all the light right at the beginning..


So there is no need to dream up a 'source-less" light?......yes, there is no need to worry that god made a light without a source. God's word teaches that god made the source for the light first!






this shows us that all of Young Earth Creationism is a lie....for its foundation is not based on what the text says...

We need to believe the Bible not men's ideas!!!!!!!

[disciple]

again...the Commandments are real...because they are in the bible....(That's why you can quote them)

Young Earth Creationism is fake...its a dreamed up teaching that is not in the Bible..(Thats why you cant quote a verse that supports it)

Let's forget YEC for the moment. We're talking about the truth of biblical creation vs. the false theory of evolution.

[disciple]

Young earth creationism hangs everything on one idea.....the 'sourceless light"


The mixed-up way the YEC teachers read the Bible they have God creating light before he makes the sun....
This is a problem ....

You cant have a light without a source so the YEC teachers have come up with all kinds of different ways to have a light without a source for that light...
and all of this is a dreamed up idea that is not actually taught in the Bible...



what is taught in the Bible?
The answer is that the Bible teaches us that god created the "source' for all the light right at the beginning..


So there is no need to dream up a 'source-less" light?......yes, there is no need to worry that god made a light without a source. God's word teaches that god made the source for the light first!






this shows us that all of Young Earth Creationism is a lie....for its foundation is not based on what the text says...

We need to believe the Bible not men's ideas!!!!!!!

Forget YEC for now. The discussion comes down to believing the truth of biblical creation or the unproven man made theory of evolution.

[alanmolstad]

Forget YEC for now. .


No...I believe that Young Earth creation is a foe we need to always confront and drive out of the church.

[alanmolstad]

No....
This is about Young earth creationism and the real damage it has done to the faith lives of many believers...


Understand that YEC is a lie....
YEC is not based on the Bible.
YEC is not found in the bible
YEC is not supported by the Bible.


One the other hand....

Evolution works hand-in-hand with the Genesis story to offer us a good understanding of early Earth history.
Evolution is not against the Bible....rather its a tool of God.

Evolution reflects the Master's hands...

as such,as a tool of the most high God, Evolution should be respected like other parts of the creation...like sunshine, rain, and water falls...etc

evolution is just another part of this creation that God has give us to enjoy...

[alanmolstad]

Now...if I say anything that you want me to support with a bible verse?...just ask me to show you where that appears in the text.

[alanmolstad]

In Evolution we can trace back all life to a single common source...and that source is the earth itself.

According to he teachings of evolution we are a part of this earth that has come to life.

also, a teaching according to Evolution is that humans and animals share a common source....(in other words, humans and animals are from the same place)



and....this agrees with the story of Genesis!!!!!

[disciple]

No....
This is about Young earth creationism and the real damage it has done to the faith lives of many believers...


Understand that YEC is a lie....
YEC is not based on the Bible.
YEC is not found in the bible
YEC is not supported by the Bible.


One the other hand....

Evolution works hand-in-hand with the Genesis story to offer us a good understanding of early Earth history.
Evolution is not against the Bible....rather its a tool of God.

Evolution reflects the Master's hands...

as such,as a tool of the most high God, Evolution should be respected like other parts of the creation...like sunshine, rain, and water falls...etc

evolution is just another part of this creation that God has give us to enjoy...

Alan,

If you can't take the creation account literally, what other scriptures can be treated the same way? John 3:16, Romans 10:9, what else? If Genesis can't be taken seriously why trust any scripture?

[alanmolstad]

well....tell me something....

When have I said I believe the Genesis story is not to be taken literally?

in fact,I believe Im the ONLY person who actually does believe the text as written.

I believe Im the ONLY person that does not need to add words to the Text to make it agree with my ideas.

Let me show you why I think this-

Tell me the verse that shows us that the 7th Day of the creation week has ended?
What verse teaches the 7th day has ended....(remember I want to believe only what the Bible "literally" says, not what people pretend it says)

[alanmolstad]

tell me....


what verse in the Creation story teaches that the 7th day has ended yet?..........none?

then what verse in the whole book of Genesis teaches that the 7th day has ended?........none?

well, what about the whole Old Testament, does any verse in the OT teach the 7th day has ended yet?..........no?



how about the whole Bible?............nothing?



how interesting.....

So if we have very clear endings to the first 6 days of the creation week, so clearly written down in the text that you cant miss it, and yet we have no verse in the whole Bible that even hints that the 7th day has ended yet I dont think we should just slap-on an ending just to make it agree with our ideas right?..... correct!

[disciple]

well....tell me something....

When have I said I believe the Genesis story is not to be taken literally?

in fact,I believe Im the ONLY person who actually does believe the text as written.

I believe Im the ONLY person that does not need to add words to the Text to make it agree with my ideas.

Let me show you why I think this-

Tell me the verse that shows us that the 7th Day of the creation week has ended?
What verse teaches the 7th day has ended....(remember I want to believe only what the Bible "literally" says, not what people pretend it says)

Alan,

I believe that all the Bible is correct and to be taken literally. I think the burden is on you to show any verse in the bible that even hints that man or any other creature evolved and were not created as recorded in Genesis.

[alanmolstad]

So to sum up what Im saying...


We don't need to add anything to the Bible!

[alanmolstad]

if you have any questions about what im saying...?
Just ask me for a verse that supports something Im saying and I will be happy to show you that verse

[alanmolstad]

so if you got a question?...just ask....

[disciple]

if you have any questions about what im saying...?
Just ask me for a verse that supports something Im saying and I will be happy to show you that verse

Show me a verse that says anything about evolution.

[alanmolstad]

Tell me the verse that shows us that the 7th Day of the creation week has ended?
)



as I have asked you this question...you can ask me one in return

[alanmolstad]

Show me a verse that says anything about evolution.

see post #31 above for an introduction to my answer.



where in the Bible does it trace back all life to?

Where is man from?....where are the animals from?

Is the answer you get the same answer as taught in evolution?






lets find out.....


the first thing we need to look at is where are the animals from?...where is their source?

[alanmolstad]

the first thing we need to look at is where are the animals from?...where is their source?


the answer:
Genesis 1:24 "And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds"
Genesis 2:19 " Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky"

So as we see, the source for all the animals is the earth itself...

[alanmolstad]

So as we see, the source for all the animals is the earth itself...


But what about humans?


Now according to the teachings of Evolution humans and animals share a common starting point and source....

But is the same thing true in the story of Genesis?

Do humans and animals share the same common source?

[alanmolstad]

Do humans and animals share the same common source?



do we?

Do we share the same common source with animals according to the Bible?

[alanmolstad]

Lets review:



according to Evolution,all life, both animal and human life all stems forth from the common source for life...that being the earth itself.
In evolution we are just a part of this earth that has come to life.


we now also have learned that according to the Bible that all animals also come forth from this earth too.

So the Bible agrees with evolution as to the source for life for the animals being the earth itself....


But what about man?
Where is the source for humans according to the genesis story?

[alanmolstad]

Where is the source for humans according to the genesis story?

(and here is your answer)


Genesis 3:19

"until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken"

[disciple]

Lets review:



according to Evolution,all life, both animal and human life all stems forth from the common source for life...that being the earth itself.
In evolution we are just a part of this earth that has come to life.


we now also have learned that according to the Bible that all animals also come forth from this earth too.

So the Bible agrees with evolution as to the source for life for the animals being the earth itself....


But what about man?
Where is the source for humans according to the genesis story?

So Alan, because God created all life out of the same elements(elements that He created) you're ***uming evolution is correct? That is your opinion you have not proven any part of the theory. Evolution does not agree with scripture nor does it agree with proven laws of science.

[disciple]

the answer:
Genesis 1:24 "And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds"
Genesis 2:19 " Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky"

So as we see, the source for all the animals is the earth itself...

So you tell us not to take Genesis literally yet you are taking the verses you cited literally.

[alanmolstad]

So Alan, because God created all life out of the same elements(elements that He created) you're ***uming evolution is correct? .

so far what Im showing you is that there is no disagreement with where the source of all life is from between evolution and genesis..

That is what we have now seen in the text.

both evolution and Genesis trace life back to the earth itself.


as for the evolution being "correct"?...that answer has to come from the merits of the science...and the science alone.


All we have now proved is that there is agreement between Evolution and genesis.

[alanmolstad]

So you tell us not to take Genesis literally ........


Where did I do that?

I believe I have said over and over that I believe "I" am the ONLY one that is actual;y reading the Text and believeing it as it's written.

The YEC teachershave to add words and change meanings...



I dont have to change anything!

I just read the text and say "Amen!"

[alanmolstad]

Once again I want to hear any questions you might have on this.

So if I have said anything that you don't think is supported by a verse of the bible?, then challenge me to name the verse that teaches in agreement with what im saying!

I want you to see what im saying is the only Truth there is.

Therefore I want you to put every word im saying to the test of scripture...



I think the text of the Bible is what I should center my words to you on.

Just like with the question I asked you (that for some reason you have yet to answer with a verse with?)

[alanmolstad]

I await any questions you or anyone else might have on what i have said so far....


an example question that you might wish to ask me would be like -

"Alan, you have said that God made the source for all the light , including the stars, on the first day as the very first thing listed He created, but the Bible says God did not make the stars until the 4th day, so how is this not a contradiction?"



any such question you may ask I will always try to answer with a verse out of the Bible..
So please dont be shy, ask me anything you want to question...

[jude1:3]

I like you Alan, but Macroevolution is Garbage. It really is.

[alanmolstad]

Still have no questions on anything I have said?

[jude1:3]

Still have no questions on anything I have said?




I just disagree with you in general.

I'm not an expert or even a laymen in this topic so I'm not really qualified or prepared to give great re****als.

[alanmolstad]

I seek only to have you ask me anything about what I'm saying...any parts you may doubt and want to know how can what I say be totally true?


Ask me just whatever you think is different than what others say

[alanmolstad]

I believe that because the YEC teachings have spread like a cancer within the Body, that it has the effect of driving out some of our best and brightest bro and sisters from the church.

All; because they cant turn a blind eye to the fact that 2things are true.
#1, evolution has more than been supported by science....
#2, that when you look at the genesis story you don't actually find any Anti-Evolution arguments.



I believe that if I can get you to take a good close look at what the text of the Bible really says in black and white,that you will come to see that there is no argument with evolution here in the text at all.

In fact,if you stick close to the text what you find is a story that walks right with evolution....they walk hand in hand...

[alanmolstad]

I like to start out by pointing to the opening verses of the Genesis story.

it says, "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"




QUESTION:....what does it say was created first "In the beginning"?

[alanmolstad]

I like to start out by pointing to the opening verses of the Genesis story.

it says, "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"




QUESTION:....what does it say was created first "In the beginning"?






The answer is:
The answer as we all know is that the Bible teaches that the very first things God created were the "heavens" and the earth.

Now this word "Heavens"can have many different meanings in context, but the important meaning here in genesis is that we can say its talking about all the stars and worlds and black holes and gas giants out in space.


So in other words, the term "Heavens"is the one single correct term to describe All that stuff!!

Thus right here at the start of the Genesis story we have God creating the SOURCE for all the light talked about later.

Both the light listed on day 1 and the light listed on day 4 have a source now.



This is why the YEC teachings are in error so badly.
The YEC teachers dont understand that there in no need to invent some type of an unknown source-less light.
The light of Genesis has a listed source thats the very same source that we see in the sky today!

[disciple]

well....tell me something....

When have I said I believe the Genesis story is not to be taken literally?

in fact,I believe Im the ONLY person who actually does believe the text as written.

I believe Im the ONLY person that does not need to add words to the Text to make it agree with my ideas.

Let me show you why I think this-

Tell me the verse that shows us that the 7th Day of the creation week has ended?
What verse teaches the 7th day has ended....(remember I want to believe only what the Bible "literally" says, not what people pretend it says)

Hi Alan,

What about the following verses, do you take them literally?

God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day. Gen 1:5

So the evening and the morning were the second day. Gen 1:8
So the evening and the morning were the third day. Gen 1:13
So the evening and the morning were the fourth day. Gen 1:19
So the evening and the morning were the fifth day. Gen 1:23
So the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Gen 1:34

Whenever "day" is modified by a number, like second day or six days, it can only mean a true solar day. There are no exceptions in Hebrew. Any uncertainty is resolved in the Ten Commandments as God commands us to work six days and rest one day just as He worked on the six creation days and rested on day seven (Exodus 20:11).

[alanmolstad]

finally.....someone wakes up and responds....

[alanmolstad]

Whenever "day" is modified by a number, like second day or six days, it can only mean a true solar day. There are no exceptions in Hebrew. .......


Zechariah 14;7 " But it shall be one day which shall be known to the Lord, not day, nor night: but it shall come to p***, that at evening time it shall be light."

Here we see that the use of a number connected to the word "day" can have an unknown and unlimited about of time ***ociated with it.
Thus there is no such 'rule" that a number connected to the word "day"always must meing only one thing in the hebrew....

many times we have a phrase that is translated to us as "for the days to come" giving it a rather unknown amount of time it is speaking of, yet the phrase in the Hebrew is actually "for the last day".
There is it translated to us from the Hebrew 'day' singular into the word "days" meaning plural due to the context of the verse that is talking about an unknown and unlimited about of time.

Now Im not surprised to hear this argument raised.
The reason I have run into this argument over the years is that a lot of older books (that are a bit out of date) that are used by many websites that dont know the truth, and that is why from time to time I hear once again this idea that a number or a time ranking ***ociated with the word "day" must mean only a 24 hr amount of time...

But this error is mostly corrected in more modern printings of many YEC books, so it does not come up that much when I run into people that have a fresh, more up to date copy of a YEC textbook.



So let me be very clear-
There is no such rule that must force us to only think of a 24hr amount of time just because the word "day" has a number ***ociated with it.


as we see in the Zech verse, the wording we read as "one day" is talking about the unlimited amount of time as also described later in Revelation 22;5.
Yet this Hebrew phrase "one day" (talking about an unlimited amount of time) actually is translated from the very same wording found at Genesis 1:5 that is translated as "first day"and yet both phrases come from the very same ...the EXACT same Hebrew phrase "yom echad"......(literally "day one")




So in other words?....In the Hebrew as we have seen we can have a number ***ociated with the word "day"and yet it can have a very unlimited and unknown amount of time it is talking about!!!!!!!
'....

[alanmolstad]

So the evening and the morning were the second day. Gen 1:8
So the evening and the morning were the third day. Gen 1:13
So the evening and the morning were the fourth day. Gen 1:19
So the evening and the morning were the fifth day. Gen 1:23
So the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Gen 1:34

.
lets not overlook Genesis 1;5 " ...And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."




so...based on the many fine verses that you and I have here now posted...would you have clear proof that the first day of the creation story has ended?

How about the 2nd day of the creation story?...could we find proof in the text that that day has ended?

and the 3rd day?

The 4th?

the 5th?

the 6th too?



Are there very clear and hard to miss endings given us by the writer of the genesis story?

Are the endings he gives us impossible to miss?

Do you have to guess the first 6 days have ended yet, or can you point to a verse that clearly shows that each day has ended already?

[alanmolstad]

and my point?



My point is this:
The writer of the Genesis story goes to great length to make sure the reader understands that of the 7 days talked about in this story, 6 of the days have very clearly defined endings.
And that points us to the missing ending of the 7th day.

There is no way around this fact.
And, if we check, there is no ending to the 7th day anywhere in the rest of the creation story.....
Nor is there an ending to the 7th day found at any place in the Old Testament...
Nor in the whole rest of the bible is there even a hint that we are to add an ending to the 7th day.


so I dont.

I dont add an ending to the 7th day of creation because there is none found in the text and Im not authorized to start adding words to the Text.

Now what happens if you just take the Genesis story as written, and do not start adding things to it?.....You get a 7th day that has no ending......no ending yet!



So if the 7th 'day"of the Creation week has not ended "yet"....how long has it been going on so far?

[jude1:3]

So if the 7th 'day"of the Creation week has not ended "yet"....how long has it been going on so far?



241




Alan it's easier just to believe God created everything in that week and just leave it at that.

If you do that then you don't have to jump through so many hoops.

[alanmolstad]

again...Im not doing anything but reading the text as its written....

Thats the part that can really tick-off a teacher of the YEC ideas....the fact that they have to add all sorts of things to make it agree with YEC teachings...
and yet at the same time all I do is read a verse and say "Amen!"

[alanmolstad]

and whats actually harder....

The YEC teachers and the way that they are always having to dream up a unknown type of Light that has no source?...

or me just pointing to the sun?

[alanmolstad]

as Bible students, the one thing we should always seek above all else is 'truth"

we are not opening the Bible because its a easy book to read.

we are not always organizing a church bible study because everyone always understands the text.






Now I know what im saying might sound kinda new you some of you,and that fine.

But what you should do is the same thing that the church did when Paul came with a new teaching...and that is that they listened to him, and then opened up their scriptures and looks to see if what Paul was saying was actually true?




thats what I hope to inspire you to do too!

Open up your Bible and check what im saying against the text...

[jude1:3]

Be careful, everyone who loves and practices a Lie will be outside the city with murderers, sexually immoral and idolaters :

*Revelation 22:14-15
Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, *and Whoever Loves and Practices a Lie.*



Macroevolution is a Lie.

[alanmolstad]

That is why I stick close to the Text as written.

It's the YEC teachings that are the lie.

[MichaellS]

as Bible students, the one thing we should always seek above all else is 'truth"

we are not opening the Bible because its a easy book to read.

we are not always organizing a church bible study because everyone always understands the text.

Now I know what im saying might sound kinda new you some of you,and that fine.

But what you should do is the same thing that the church did when Paul came with a new teaching...and that is that they listened to him, and then opened up their scriptures and looks to see if what Paul was saying was actually true?

thats what I hope to inspire you to do too!

Open up your Bible and check what im saying against the text...

But there is a problem with that. As you know, I do not agree with the hypothesis of “evolution” for a number of reasons we have discussed in the past. Here, the problem with going ahead and jumping into the word is that what if the undertaking someone is invited to attend and invest study time in, is in fact so powerful, so insidious of a fast-track seducer offering its version of “truth” in turn actually upsets faith, working more harm to some than if they were not to consider it at all. Then I would like to ask you two questions.

I would be curious to know even before any conclusions were reached on this or anything we come across, what method of safeguarding should we use to abide by the word’s warnings of what to watch out for when studying:

1. Shift of meanings
2. Off-limit concepts

The word warns us of these for a reason. I am confident you know where I am going. I am confident you know there is more to it than just read. I’m just a bible student that only knows scriptures that run counter to this issue, but what if I didn’t? What do I keep in mind to support these two before I set out on any issue? I already touched on it here in part.

Again, this I am curious before any issue is raised, what are the things we should use? Possibly, you have spoken about this elsewhere.?.?

Mike.
.

[alanmolstad]

[FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4]But there is a problem with that. As you know, I do not agree with the hypothesis of “evolution” for a number of reasons .....


I once was in this huge debate on the question of how to look at Genesis in connection with evolution.

But the Young Earth Creation teacher I was in the debate with was always getting upset with me because I would never defend Evolution.
He had just tons and tons of Anti-Evolution arguments all ready to go, but I simply did not really care what things he said against evolution.

I kept going back to the Bible...I kept answering his points with Scripture.

I kept pointing out to him that I was not there to "teach" Evolution.
I kept pointing out that I had never tried to teach anyone about Evolution, rather I just kept pointing out to people that if they open their Bible they will see that there are no Anti-Evolution arguments found within the text.


Thats all Im here to do as well.

Im not here to convince you that Evolution is true.

Im not qualified to teach you or anyone else science.

But I can talk to you about what both you and I can read in our Bibles.
I can show you things that perhaps you have never noticed before.

and I can point out to you the simple fact that the story of Genesis will actually walk hand-in-hand with Evolution nicely.

[MichaellS]

I once was in this huge debate on the question of how to look at Genesis in connection with evolution.

But the Young Earth Creation teacher I was in the debate with was always getting upset with me because I would never defend Evolution.
He had just tons and tons of Anti-Evolution arguments all ready to go, but I simply did not really care what things he said against evolution.

I kept going back to the Bible...I kept answering his points with Scripture.

I kept pointing out to him that I was not there to "teach" Evolution.
I kept pointing out that I had never tried to teach anyone about Evolution, rather I just kept pointing out to people that if they open their Bible they will see that there are no Anti-Evolution arguments found within the text.


Thats all Im here to do as well.

Im not here to convince you that Evolution is true.

Im not qualified to teach you or anyone else science.

But I can talk to you about what both you and I can read in our Bibles.
I can show you things that perhaps you have never noticed before.

and I can point out to you the simple fact that the story of Genesis will actually walk hand-in-hand with Evolution nicely.

I don’t understand. How are you not instructing if you can “point out”? A person doesn’t need a Doctorate to lead thought and discussion. But that too shifts attention away from my request any bible student should know.

I know after such an excursion of study which you have obviously endured, for you speak rather extensively. Then in your own words; how are we to safeguard against these two the bible warns us of? Okay, make that one question instead of the earlier two, , in your own words.

1. Shift of meanings
2. Off-limit concepts

I’m not searching for a confrontation Alan, just to understand your position.

Mike.
.

[alanmolstad]

[FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4Then I would like to ask you two questions.

.......


You then go on and on ,and I see 2points raised,and then a bunch of question marks, so Im not really all that sure what two questions you are interested in wanting me to address?

But the main point of your post seemed to be centered on what shall we use as Bible students to judge the truthfulness of what Im saying?


My answer is to once again point out that this same situation has come up before in the Bible,and so we have a very good example of how we should proceed.

Acts 17:2 sets the stage for us-
"As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,"

Here we see that Paul went to the Jews with the Good News about the death of the Christ. We also note here that when Paul taught he used the Scriptures.
Paul did not try to use some other source to support his teachings, rather he was reasoning with people from the Scriptures.

This is how we should proceed as well,following in Paul's example.

We should reason with each other from the Scriptures.

Acts 17:3 "He explained the prophecies and proved that the Messiah must suffer and rise from the dead."
This is the point where Paul had the trouble.
The Jews at the time had the common understanding that the Messiah would lead an army and get rid of the Romans.
Paul was teaching that the Messiah had died by the hand of the Romans.

So this is way, way different than the teaching that were being spread by the teachers at the time.


Kinda like what Im saying here to you!
Im saying things that are totally against what is being spread in the church by the YEC teachers.

But just as Paul would reason with people from the Scriptures to prove his point, so too I must use the scriptures to prove my point.


Now the story moves to how the Jews responded?
Acts 17:5 "But other Jews were jealous; so they rounded up some bad characters from the marketplace, formed a mob..."



This is a common way people stop ideas that they dont like, but cant argue against because they find that the Scriptures are not much help to their position.....they form a mob and they try to force people to be quiet rather then picking up the Bible and trying to prove their point with the Scriptures.

This happens today too....
People try to use other means to judge a Bible teaching by rather than comparing Scripture with scripture.


But we have a good example to learn from too in the life of Paul-

Acts 17:11 "Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."





Here is how we are to judge what Im talking about!

The people in this city listened with interest to what Paul was talking about...But rather than forming a mob, rather than looking for other means to prove Paul wrong, what they do is pick up the Bible and look at the very Scriptures that Paul was using to see if what Paul was saying was true?





That is our answer!


To judge what Genesis is teaching, we should oepn up the Bible, turn to the book of Genesis, and, .......Read.....

[alanmolstad]

I don’t understand. How are you not instructing if you can “point out”?


Im a student of the Bible.

Im not a student of science.


Over the years I have been in many a Bible study, and I also have been blessed a few times in teaching a Bible Study to students.

So I can say Im a "Bible teacher" because I have taught the Bible a few times in my life.
The Bible I know.

But Im not a science teacher.
Im not here to teach science.


So this is why I can say Im not here to teach evolution.
But I can say Im here to point out a few things the Bible says and does not say.

[alanmolstad]

so......therefore knowing we have this example to follow , and knowing that we are to use the Scriptures to judge what Im saying, how should we proceed?

Like this-





an example would be found in my teaching about the first things god creates.

The Young Earth teachers teach us that the first thing God makes is "light"
However the YEC also teach that God did not make the sun and Stars until day 4, so right off the bat we have the YEC teachings at odd with science.

The result to the students of the YEC teachers is that they are taught that "Science is against the bible"
And thats stars a ball rolling down a hill, and soon the student is going to have to say "Science is wrong' and believe all types of ever-changing invented ideas the YEc teachers come up with to support that view ...

Or....


Or the Bible student is being pushed to say, "The Bible is a lie" and find themselves pushed out of the church.




That is the result of the work of the YEC teachers in the church.


I have a different teaching.
My teaching is to point out that the Bible does not actually say that "light" was the first thing God made "In the beginning"

I point out to students that what the bible actually says is "In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth"
I point out that the word "Heavens" can mean all the stars like our own Sun and space itself.

I point out that this is in total agreement with what Science teaches about the Big bang and the creation of the universe.



My teaching is supported by the Scriptures, as we learn they should be.

The teachings of the YEC teachers is invented because it agrees only with what they would have wanted the Bible to have said...not what it actually says...



My teachings bring the Bible student to see science and evolution as just another natural part of the Lord's creation....like rain and snow, and sunsets.

The teachings of the YEC teachers force Bible students to need to call either all of science a "lie" or all the bible a "lie"



I see harmony between science and my faith
They see only confrontation , the result of witch means the best and brightest Bible students end up walking away from the church.


I like my way better....



Be that as it may, it falls to the person listening to me to pick up their bible and see if what Im saying is true?
Challenge me!
ask me, "Where does it say that in the bible?"

[disciple]

Im a student of the Bible.

Im not a student of science.


Over the years I have been in many a Bible study, and I also have been blessed a few times in teaching a Bible Study to students.

So I can say Im a "Bible teacher" because I have taught the Bible a few times in my life.
The Bible I know.

But Im not a science teacher.
Im not here to teach science.


So this is why I can say Im not here to teach evolution.
But I can say Im here to point out a few things the Bible says and does not say.

Let's suppose that I am a person reading the bible and I read Isaiah 53, I read John 3:16, I read Romans 10:9-10, I read Ephesians 2:8-9.
I read other scripture and realize by conviction of the Holy Spirit that I am a sinner and need a savior. By what I have read and believed in
the scriptures and by the measure of faith and grace I receive from God, I confess my sins, repent and receive Christ as my Savior. I have
been led to salvation by the truth of scripture.
Now suppose I am the same person reading the book of Genesis, the same true scriptures that led me to eternal life. I have no science
book, no copy of Darwin's Origin of Species. What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape for
"all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

[alanmolstad]

. What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape ....".
what came before the ape?

what came before that according to Evolution?
and before that?...and before that?

What does Evolution trace back all life to?...
where is evolution's starting point?
What are the first building blocks of all life according to evolution...where is life 'from"?




I believe I have said.....a few times now...that Im not here to teach evolution.
So knowing that I do not teach on evolution,I will address your question a slightly different way.

Here is the question I will address,"Does the story of Genesis trace back all life to a single common source>...and is that single common source the same source for life as taught in evolution?"



My answer appears on this topic , check posts numbered #41 , #42, #43, #44, #45 and #46







as you will learn when you go over them past posts, my answer is centered around the scriptures.

[disciple]

what came before the ape?

what came before that according to Evolution?
and before that?...and before that?

What does Evolution trace back all life to?...
where is evolution's starting point?
What are the first building blocks of all life according to evolution...where is life 'from"?




I believe I have said.....a few times now...that Im not here to teach evolution.
So knowing that I do not teach on evolution,I will address your question a slightly different way.

Here is the question I will address,"Does the story of Genesis trace back all life to a single common source>...and is that single common source the same source for life as taught in evolution?"



My answer appears on this topic , check posts numbered #41 , #42, #43, #44, #45 and #46







as you will learn when you go over them past posts, my answer is centered around the scriptures.

I guess I will have to answer my question. The correct answer is there is no scripture that teaches or suggests that evolution happened, can happen or agrees with scripture. Evolution is a theory and an unproven theory at that, it walks hand in hand with worldly, secular teaching.

[alanmolstad]

I guess I will have to answer my question. The correct answer is there is no scripture that teaches or suggests that evolution happened, can happen or agrees with scripture. Evolution is a theory and an unproven theory at that, it walks hand in hand with worldly, secular teaching.
again...I can only answer from the scriptures,,,and they do teach a story that will walk in harmony with the teachings of science and evolution.

and I would also point out that there are no anti-evolution arguments in the story too.


Thus there is no reason to be against the teachings of an old earth, and the teachings of evolution based on what the bible says...

Therefore the teachings of evolution can be judged on their truthfulness by the SCIENCE!.....and we dont need to worry that they are against anything in the Bible, because they are not.



I view evolution as a tool of the Lord's hands....something he created to use for his will.

Like rain,
Like sunshine

natural parts of the Lord's creation.....worthy of being respected.

[disciple]

again...I can only answer from the scriptures,,,and they do teach a story that will walk in harmony with the teachings of science and evolution.

and I would also point out that there are no anti-evolution arguments in the story too.


Thus there is no reason to be against the teachings of an old earth, and the teachings of evolution based on what the bible says...

Therefore the teachings of evolution can be judged on their truthfulness by the SCIENCE!.....and we dont need to worry that they are against anything in the Bible, because they are not.



I view evolution as a tool of the Lord's hands....something he created to use for his will.

Like rain,
Like sunshine

natural parts of the Lord's creation.....worthy of being respected.

Alan,
If you judge evolution by science, it is found unprovable and at odds with proven and accepted scientific laws such
as the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Also as you have said above it is your view, it is not scriptural. You have shown
no evidence from scripture the evolution is a "tool" used by God, you have just given your opinion of evolution, which
of course you have a right to.

[alanmolstad]

Alan,
If you judge evolution by science, it is found unprovable and at odds with proven and accepted scientific laws such
as the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Also as you have said above it is your view, it is not scriptural. You have shown
no evidence from scripture the evolution is a "tool" used by God, you have just given your opinion of evolution, which
of course you have a right to.

is there some part of "I dont teach evolution" that is hard for people to grasp?

Why do you then attack evolution to me as if Im going to rush-in to defend it?

I dont defend evolution.....

I dont teach evolution....so dont come to me with questions about it as Im not a man of science and have no right nor ability to act like i can teach evolution.


What i can do is teach on what the Bible says,,,or does not say...

You can ask me Bible questions.
I can give you Bible-backed answers...



I have been asked about how Evolution and genesis can be seen to be in agreement?...and i have answered with the Scriptures...
It then falls to you to open your bible and see if what im saying is true?




Does the bible literally say that God made the heavens and the earth in the beginning or not?

Does the Bible literally say the source of all life, (including humans) is the earth itself or not?

Does the Bible literally say there is an ending to the first 6 days of the Genesis creation week yet not have any ending in the whole Bible for the 7th day yet or not?
Do you have more questions?

[alanmolstad]

Does the bible literally say that God made the heavens and the earth in the beginning or not?

Does the Bible literally say the source of all life, (including humans) is the earth itself or not?

Does the Bible literally say there is an ending to the first 6 days of the Genesis creation week yet not have any ending in the whole Bible for the 7th day yet or not?



I believe I have addressed each of these questions and given answers to each from the Scriptures.

What I have shown is that YEC is simply not in the Bible.

[MichaellS]

I’m really feeling like I’m getting the treatment here concerning whether or not you introduce evolution. If there are finer points on why you both can and cannot lay claim to its intros, then that too is your prerogative to keep them, but I would advise, you may want to divest a little further explanation of said parameter for the benefit of your audience.

Though you say you “don’t teach evolution” and are “not here to teach evolution”, but in another comment “teach on what the Bible says,,,or does not say” concerning evolution. So then, I think you’re maintaining you don’t get a salary and have Christian speaking engagements, but when it comes to the bible, you do teach evolution? Fine.

You maintain that we need to drive YEC out of the church. This undoubtedly is based on your bible teaching of evolution. Good, you have a sense of urgency. Again, you may have finer points of thought rolling around to p*** on the other urgency.

I really don’t see the difference you currently promote and acquaint yourself with, this use of scripture. How different is it if I were to set out and interpret this as, , shall we say evolution of dung:


“I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung” (Phil 3:8)

I would hope some level of urgency rises up for that as it attempts to add to the sacred scriptures that points to wanting more of Christ, not to pay attention to an evolution of accomplishment. Also known as “extra-biblical”.



Here is how we are to judge what Im talking about!

The people in this city listened with interest to what Paul was talking about...But rather than forming a mob, rather than looking for other means to prove Paul wrong, what they do is pick up the Bible and look at the very Scriptures that Paul was using to see if what Paul was saying was true?


Do we operate in “revelation” as Paul did?


“For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but by a revelation of Jesus” (Gal 1:12)

As I mentioned, there is a reason why the bible warns us of both of my points, Because God knew before-hand that it could happen. Since there seems to be a lack of Pauls around who operate that way, it would be wise to heed the fuller instruction. For he was so deep into revelation that he was subjected to a specific torment in the flesh to keep him from being exalted too high II Cor12:7. But it didn’t stop there, Peter had to come to the defense of those who finds it hard to comprehend:


“, , our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. (II Cor 3:15, 16).

Obviously, a warning goes out to guard against the “shift of meanings”. A warning of not only unskillful, but the unstable. What I was searching for Alan was if there is anything of face-value that can guide us to well-founded teaching? The absence of which leads to my next listed warning; “off-limit concepts”. Notice the care they were concerned with over the integrity and purity of the text. Why? Because it was happening with those whom they were familiar:


“We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ,” (II Cor 10:5)

Even with these two examples I chose, 1. keeping a tight-reign on the interpretation of all scripture and 2. the refusal of all counter-productive thoughts, we still might not adequately supply the younger in Christ with the appropriate mindset. Is there anything else of face-value that they could use? I think so, some are scripture, some reasoning, if you can think of any others, be my guest.

1. If un-customary thoughts do enter, they aren’t necessarily bad, but where do they lead?


A. Do they return glory to God?
B. Does it point back to the cross?
C. Do they rejoice in God’s provision?
D. Do they tend to sidestep providence?
E. Do they remain in a more coveted state?

2. What is the difference between Holy Spirit understanding, and conjecture?


A. Is the level of rejoicing in the unity with others present?
B. Is the level of rejoicing mixed with strong H.S. agreement within?

3. Should I care all that much as long as it is teachings in the Bible?

Where does the glory of the spiritual instructor set, does it convey knowledge and humility?


“See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.” (Col 2:8)

"A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough." (Gal 5:9)

“That no flesh should glory in his presence.” I Cor 1:29)

“But he that glories, let him glory in the Lord” (II Cor 10:17)

Mike.
.

[alanmolstad]

Young earth creationism is an invention of man...Its not based on the Bible, rather its mostly based on what people would have wished the bible taught.

I always quote the scripture when I teach...

It falls to the person hearing my teaching to open their Bible and put my words to the very same test that they put the words of Paul to.
"What test is that Alan?"

You test what Im saying by opening the Bible and reading it for yourself.


That...and only that, is what we are to do.

[alanmolstad]

Does the bible literally say that God made the heavens and the earth in the beginning or not?

Does the Bible literally say the source of all life, (including humans) is the earth itself or not?

Does the Bible literally say there is an ending to the first 6 days of the Genesis creation week yet not have any ending in the whole Bible for the 7th day yet or not?
?....so far I have not seen anyone attempt to answer my questions...


How very interesting...

[MichaellS]

Again, you may have finer points of thought rolling around to p*** on the other urgency.


You test what Im saying by opening the Bible and reading it for yourself.

That...and only that, is what we are to do.

Not according to the scripture which has to do with the handling of it. If it doesn’t apply, then where at?


I always quote the scripture when I teach...

Who said that is the problem? It isn’t.


You test what Im saying by opening the Bible and reading it for yourself.

If your saying what I herein reference is wrong, then where at?

Opening the bible is one thing, I get it, okay? But do you get this; to use it within God’s warnings of misuse is another. You seem to want to distance yourself from the warnings of handling the word as the word itself describes and instead parade the issue. Two entirely separate things yet related to this thread.

[alanmolstad]

Im simply asking you to listen to what Im saying that the Bible is teaching, (as they listened to Paul also taught what the Bible was teaching).....and test my words the very same way as they tested Paul's words...



If you cant?....well, then just ask me to support anything I have said with a verse out of the text and you can decide for yourself if what Im saying is true...

Or ....if the idea or reading the bible alone scares the**** out of you...

Then, simply answer the 3 questions i asked that everyone is ducking.





(But I mostly prefer you stick to option 1 )

[MichaellS]

Im simply asking you to listen to what Im saying that the Bible is teaching

Urgency number one:


Alan’s dissertation of evolution from the bible.

Urgency number two:


God’s full warning against mishandling the bible.

What good is urgency number one if we are lead to trample upon urgency number two?

Mike.
.

[alanmolstad]

I
Or ... simply answer the 3 questions i asked that everyone is ducking.

)

How frightening it must be for some people....to be confronted by the facts when you open the Bible and read it for yourself ...

How it must upset the apple-cart, to suddenly see that the Bible says things you simply wish it did not say.



How calming it might be to think to yourself..."I will pretend the Bible says something else"

[alanmolstad]

My advice?

Be brave.....you can do this...


Remember,there is a reason God has placed the Bible into your hands.

He trusts you.






One of the lies told the church before the Reformation was "You can't read the Bible for yourself".

This is the same lie told today to people who have been sucked into the world of the CULTS.
This is the Lie told Mormons, this is the Lie told people in the JWs...this is the Lie told to the Moonies.....etc,etc,etc

Throughout all of history this is the same Lie told to people to justify the wall that the CULT will build between members of the CULT an their Lord.

CULTS teach that you "must" remain within the CULT to learn the secrets of God....to learn how to approach God.....

CULTS teach that you cant just open the Scriptures in the privacy of your own home and expect to find truth....

CULTS teach that they and they alone are the only path to God, the ONLY path to truth.

So what do I think of that?
I disagree with the CULTS>
I disagree with their idea that you cant find Truth on your own.

I believe the reason you have that Bible in your hands is because God trusts you with it.

[alanmolstad]

When I was younger we had our church bring in speakers to our Bible Study .
one of the speakers was named Mr Ken Ham, who turns out to be about the most important living Young Earth Creation teacher!

Over the next 8 weeks Mr Ken Ham taught my Bible Study his "ORIGINS bible study of Genesis.

So this is the reason I know every argument put up against me by people that believe the YEC teachers.
The reason is, is that I have heard it all before and heard it from the best there is.

So that is also why I enjoy getting questions about what I have taught people,for the questions are all from the same source of the YEC,they are all questions I have had to answer a long time ago....never anything new...:)

Now I also got a chance to attend another cl*** on Genesis taught by a different teacher, a Dr Hugh Ross.
Mr Ross had afar better grasp on the truth that Mr Ham did.
While I still found errors in a few of the teachings of Ross as well, it was yet very refreshing to finally see a person willing and brave enough to open the Bible for themselves and read what it says, rather than ***uming the Bible says somethings but not willing to prove it by reading where it says it.

[MichaellS]

Oh I see where you want to go now, you want me to start in eh?

No need, because everyone can see which comes first, God’s advice on handling, not your teaching.

But you maintain its all in the teaching, , then maybe, , somewhere down the road we’ll remember what God said over the dangers of private manipulations to twist His book. When in spirit, the translation to all your deflections read:


“I can’t possibly subject myself to that, I might have to trim the message, , and I don’t want to subject myself to that.”

How can you do this and refuse God’s clear advice?

I can tell over much of what you send, doesn’t return my reasoning on the exact thing you bring up. Why would you, your too busy setting up all these pre-defeated straw-men. Happy dodge-hunting!

Maybe you could suggest an ignore list for some of those warnings in God's word that bother you.

[alanmolstad]

Now when I was in Mr Ken Ham's ORIGINS cl***, there was a single moment where I saw for myself the biggest error in the YEC teachings.
That error is when Ken was teaching on the first thing God created.

For the YEC believer, the first thing they think God created was "light", and because they also believe that God did not make the sun until Day 4, they have to invent a means to have light without any source for the light to come from.

This starts the ball rolling for the YEC believer.
The ball to be against science.
For science says that the Big Bang, and stars like our sun were created billions of years ago.


When I heard Mr ken Ham teach on this stuff something just clicked in my mind and I opened the Bible and started to read it for myself.
That is the moment I saw that the Bible does not actually say what Ken ham was teaching it said.

The Bible says something very different.
The Bible says that the first thing God created in the beginning was "the heavens" not the light at all.

So right at the start, the UEC teachings have a wrong foundation for all the teachings they hold to.

The Bible simply does not teach that God made "light" before god made the sun and stars.




Think Im wrong?
Think the Bible teaches that god made light before he made the sun?.........go prove it.



You cant.....

Thats why so many people get so upset with me, and dont want to try to answer my 3 questions.
They are afraid to open their Bible and read it for themselves because they know deep down in their hearts that Im right.

They know Im right, but dont want to face that fact in the black and white of the text ....

[MichaellS]

Now when I was in Mr Ken Ham's ORIGINS cl***, there was a single moment where I saw for myself the biggest error in the YEC teachings.
That error is when Ken was teaching on the first thing God created.

For the YEC believer, the first thing they think God created was "light", and because they also believe that God did not make the sun until Day 4, they have to invent a means to have light without any source for the light to come from.

This starts the ball rolling for the YEC believer.
The ball to be against science.
For science says that the Big Bang, and stars like our sun were created billions of years ago.


When I heard Mr ken Ham teach on this stuff something just clicked in my mind and I opened the Bible and started to read it for myself.
That is the moment I saw that the Bible does not actually say what Ken ham was teaching it said.

The Bible says something very different.
The Bible says that the first thing God created in the beginning was "the heavens" not the light at all.

So right at the start, the UEC teachings have a wrong foundation for all the teachings they hold to.

The Bible simply does not teach that God made "light" before god made the sun and stars.




Think Im wrong?
Think the Bible teaches that god made light before he made the sun?.........go prove it.



You cant.....

Thats why so many people get so upset with me, and dont want to try to answer my 3 questions.
They are afraid to open their Bible and read it for themselves because they know deep down in their hearts that Im right.

They know Im right, but dont want to face that fact in the black and white of the text ....

More denial. I know, because you couldn't bear the thought of subjecting yourself to the truth. Give it up, no one is interested in the insights of denial.

[MichaellS]

Anyone else interested may want to weigh-in. Is it advisable to cut-away portions of God's will explained. Is that true road that leads to knowledge?

[alanmolstad]

But...when you turn and read about the events of the 4th day, does it not say God made the sun on that day?

Nope.


But does not not clearly say god "also made"the stars on the 4thday?

Nope.




But in my Bible it says ,and I quote :" 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars." so does that not prove 100% that God made both the sun and moon on the 4th day as well as the stars?

nope.






Why not?



The answer is that the writer of Genesis is careful to not say that the "sun" or that the "moon" was created on the 4thday.
Notice we are only talking about the introduction of the "greater" and the "lesser" light.

Greater and lesser are AMOUNTS of light.

So the writer of genesis is talking about a change in the amount of light that is seen on the earth on the 4th day, and the writer of genesis also goes out of his way to make sure we dont think the sun and moon are created on this day by not using the words 'sun"and "moon"in what he is talking about.

So the sun nor the moon is said to be made on the 4th day.



But it says the 'stars' are made on the 4th day?

Nope





But I just quoted the verse and it says in black and white "also made the stars"

Nope, that is not actually what the Hebrew text says there....



Its not in the Hebrew?

Nope,just look at the verse in a translation that will put the added words in brackets[] that tell us what words are there and what were added later by an editor.
http://genius.com/Holy-bible-kjv-genesis-1-annotated




so the words that teach that the stars were made on the 4thday do not appear in the text but were just simply added?

yes.

[MichaellS]

But...when you turn and read about the events of the 4th day, does it not say God made the sun on that day?

Nope.

But does not not clearly say god "also made"the stars on the 4thday?

Nope.

But in my Bible it says ,and I quote :" 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars." so does that not prove 100% that God made both the sun and moon on the 4th day as well as the stars?

nope.






Why not?



The answer is that the writer of Genesis is careful to not say that the "sun" or that the "moon" was created on the 4thday.
Notice we are only talking about the introduction of the "greater" and the "lesser" light.

Greater and lesser are AMOUNTS of light.

So the writer of genesis is talking about a change in the amount of light that is seen on the earth on the 4th day, and the writer of genesis also goes out of his way to make sure we dont think the sun and moon are created on this day by not using the words 'sun"and "moon"in what he is talking about.

So the sun nor the moon is said to be made on the 4th day.



But it says the 'stars' are made on the 4th day?

Nope





But I just quoted the verse and it says in black and white "also made the stars"

Nope, that is not actually what the Hebrew text says there....

Its not in the Hebrew?

Nope,just look at the verse in a translation that will put the added words in brackets[] that tell us what words are there and what were added later by an editor.
http://genius.com/Holy-bible-kjv-genesis-1-annotated

so the words that teach that the stars were made on the 4thday do not appear in the text but were just simply added?

yes.

Ha, guess I'm now on his ignore list. Opps, sorry if not as that would remind him of the scriptures.

[alanmolstad]

Now let me wrap up that important point Im making.



The whole house of cards that the YEC teachers feel they need to build, is all because when they read the bible they believe it teaches that god created LIGHT before he created the SUN.

They also believe that the bible teaches that god made the sun, moon, and stars on the 4th day.


So all the YEC books and all the YEC websites that preach to us about the Young earth Creation teachings, are all because the YEC teachers had to connect the light at the start of the story with the sun that was not created until later in the story.

but thats all only a false problem that is not actually taught in the Bible at all.





What the bible actually teaches is that god made the sun and stars first.

The bible teaches that the amount of light seen on the earth over time changed.

Thats all the bible is saying, and it happens to be in agreement with what science says happened in our history too!

[alanmolstad]

Ha, guess I'm now on his ignore list. Opps, sorry if not as that would remind him of the scriptures.
if you want to add to the conversation?...fine.
But if you dont, thats ok with me too...

I have many things Im going to be going over and I invite you to be part of the conversation...
But if you want to just sit back and watch from the fence?...thats cool with me too...


I dont really care what you do at this point.

[alanmolstad]

it is the only time during the 8-week Ken Ham cl*** that i raised my hand and asked a question.

The question I asked came right after ken was talking about the first thing he believes God created (light)...I raised my hand and asked "What was the first thing the bible lists that God created "in the beginning"?

Later after the cl*** was over a bunch of members of my cl*** came up to me and we had a great conversation about what Ken was saying compared to what i have pointed out to the cl*** the Bible actually was saying...



everyone saw quickly there was a difference...

[alanmolstad]

it is the only time during the 8-week Ken Ham cl*** that i raised my hand and asked a question.

The question I asked came right after ken was talking about the first thing he believes God created (light)...I raised my hand and asked "What was the first thing the bible lists that God created "in the beginning"?

Later after the cl*** was over a bunch of members of my cl*** came up to me and we had a great conversation about what Ken was saying compared to what i have pointed out to the cl*** the Bible actually was saying...



everyone saw quickly there was a difference...



To this very day, it is on this same issue that I always first challenge people to put aside what the YEC have taught them that the bible says, and to open the bible for themselves and find out for themselves what the bible actually says.

some people can actually read the bible for themselves.

Some people dont need someone looking over their shoulder while they read God's word...

But not every person.
More times that I can count I have found people that simply will not allow themselves to read the bible alone.
They are very much afraid of what they will find in the bible...

I dont really know how to help such people.
In a very real way, its like their hearts are trapped .

I can only show them that the Bible will encourage them to draw closer to God though reading His word.
I can only show them that God is putting His word into their hands for a reason...that reason is that though his word you learn about him.


and perhaps a first step to the goal of being able to read the bible on your own would be to answer a few questions about what the text says?

let me copy/paste my 3 questions again to see how you do answering them....

[alanmolstad]

Question #1 - Does the bible literally say at genesis 1:1 that God made the heavens and the earth in the beginning?

[MichaellS]

Oh hi, lost in the denials you know. Sure, I’ll be around from time to time to remind the reader out of courtesy of your selective response habits from post #71-onward.

How did I do? Oh yeah, we are denying that. Personally, this stubborn madness is embarr***ing.

Some mention of the truth though, that's all.

[alanmolstad]

QUESTION #2 - Does the Bible literally say at Genesis 1:24, Genesis 2:19and Genesis 3:19 the source of all life, (including humans) is the earth itself ?

[MichaellS]

Oh hi, lost in the denials you know. Sure, I’ll be around from time to time to remind the reader out of courtesy of your selective response habits critical to this thread from post #71-onward.

How did I do? Oh yeah, we are denying that. Personally, this stubborn madness is embarr***ing.

At least some mention of the truth though, that's all.

[alanmolstad]

QUESTION #3 - Does the Bible literally say there is an ending to the first 6 days of the Genesis creation week yet not have any ending in the whole Bible for the 7th day?

[MichaellS]

Oh hi, lost in the denials you know. Sure, I’ll be around from time to time to remind the reader out of courtesy of your selective response habits critical to this thread from post #71-onward. Personally, this stubborn madness is embarr***ing.

How did I do? Oh yeah, we are denying that.

[alanmolstad]

If you are brave enough to answer these 3 little questions by opening your Bible and seeking only truth?....then you are just like the Bereans talked about in ACTS 17:11 http://biblehub.com/acts/17-11.htm

For you are doing just what we are instructed to do when we hear a teachings that is new to us.
We are to open our Bibles and see for ourselves if what is being said is found in the Scriptures?

[alanmolstad]

Just checking to see if anyone answer even one of the questions yet?....

[MichaellS]

If you are brave enough to answer these 3 little questions by opening your Bible and seeking only truth?....then you are just like the Bereans talked about in ACTS 17:11 http://biblehub.com/acts/17-11.htm

For you are doing just what we are instructed to do when we hear a teachings that is new to us.
We are to open our Bibles and see for ourselves if what is being said is found in the Scriptures?

“Brave”? Brave my foot. While it may be your prerogative to resist the scriptural treatment as I have pointed out, it is no excuse to foster damage to lead those astray who can’t yet recognize the cl*** of people you lightheartedly refuse ***ociation with.

As the Lord said:


“My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it." (Luke 8:21)

"Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it." (Luke 11:28)

To be blessed and considered His brother, what could be better? There are not enough explanations left in the world to subs***ute for an agreement in the word. How does it go for those who claim Christian status, you remember don’t you?


“They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being, , , disobedient” (***us 1:16)

[alanmolstad]

yes...."brave"...you know,the opposite of chicken...



I am only asking questions.....
How weak is your faith that 3 simple questions cause you such concern for your salvation...

Seems to me that is someone like me can cause you such fear just with 3questions, that perhaps you might want to check how deep your religious faith actually is?>>>>

Seems to me it starting to sound like its a house built of shifting sand or what?....




Here is the truth, if your religion is so weak, with such small roots, that perhaps you might well be in the wrong religion.


a Christian's faith is never supposed to be so easily upset that one lone guy asking 3 little questions can cause the whole house to fall...
if that were the case, how could you possible hope to stand up against attacks that come from the world of the CULTS?




now come on....the Bible gives us an example, that when it comes to such things as a Bible study "Iron sharpens Iron"
That men are suppose to be able to stand up for their faith and in doing so make their faith more perfect.

We are not to hide our faith under a bed and hope the bad Alan with his hard 3 questions gets tired and goes away......

[alanmolstad]

Question #1 - Does the bible literally say at genesis 1:1 that God made the heavens and the earth in the beginning?

[alanmolstad]

QUESTION #2 - Does the Bible literally say at Genesis 1:24, Genesis 2:19and Genesis 3:19 the source of all life, (including humans) is the earth itself ?

[alanmolstad]

QUESTION #3 - Does the Bible literally say there is an ending to the first 6 days of the Genesis creation week yet not have any ending in the whole Bible for the 7th day?

[BigJulie]

Question #1 - Does the bible literally say at genesis 1:1 that God made the heavens and the earth in the beginning?

No, what is literally says is: ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν

or... first (chiefly, beginning, choicest part), elohim (translated gods, rulers, judges, angels) created (shaped or formed), the heavens (visible heavens, universe, or sky) and (not a Hebrew word, not a real translation) earth (land, ground).

[BigJulie]

QUESTION #3 - Does the Bible literally say there is an ending to the first 6 days of the Genesis creation week yet not have any ending in the whole Bible for the 7th day?

Regarding the creation, Moses tells us "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," Genesis 2:4

In Hebrew, the word for "day" can also be a period of time or a division or time.

To look at the Hebrew translation, Moses is saying--according to what has been p***ed down through the generations.

In this verse we also get clarity as to elohim--who created the heavens and earth.

[BigJulie]

QUESTION #2 - Does the Bible literally say at Genesis 1:24, Genesis 2:19and Genesis 3:19 the source of all life, (including humans) is the earth itself ?

The name Adam in Hebrew, literally means dirt or ground. Everything on the earth is made up of dirt, minerals, etc. and spirit. Therefore, everything living thing on earth is made from the earth and alive by the spirit (or not of this earth, but divine).

[alanmolstad]

The name Adam in Hebrew, literally means dirt or ground. Everything on the earth is made up of dirt, minerals, etc. and spirit. Therefore, everything living thing on earth is made from the earth and alive by the spirit (or not of this earth, but divine).

Thanks Julie...

I'm also thankful to find I still got at least this Bible student to step forward and give her answer.

[alanmolstad]

Its also nice to see people "stray off the reservation"...and pop down to a few of the other sections of the Walter Martin message forum.....

[alanmolstad]

Now.....while a few brave souls are struggling with how to answer my 3 questions and not look like they agree with me...Im going to start to move on to another in the teachings that i have to share with you today.


This next topic will be about the "waters" talked about in genesis.

According to the teachings of science, the early Earth was first a dead , dry world....and that later though volcanic and hydro-thermal activity water, (or fog, or whatever) came froth from underground and gave the earth its cloud cover and later its water...


but what story about the waters covering the earth does the Genesis account tell us?

is it the same as the story told by science?

[alanmolstad]

In the genesis account, is the earth created as a dead, dry world as taught by science?.....or was the earth created with seas already covering the land?

[alanmolstad]

well.........what i think is that the story we are taught in Genesis, turns out to be the very same story told to us by modern science....


Thats means that the Bible must teach that the earth was created by God as a dead, dry world too.....


is that really what the Bible teaches us however?.....





What do you read?

[jude1:3]

Alan the 7 days of creation have already p***ed. God created all things and Macroevolution is demonic garbage and a Huge Lie. You shouldn't champion it because it's in direct opposition to Biblical Christianity.

[MichaellS]

yes...."brave"...you know,the opposite of chicken...

I am only asking questions.....
How weak is your faith that 3 simple questions cause you such concern for your salvation...

Seems to me that is someone like me can cause you such fear just with 3questions, that perhaps you might want to check how deep your religious faith actually is?>>>>

Seems to me it starting to sound like its a house built of shifting sand or what?....

Here is the truth, if your religion is so weak, with such small roots, that perhaps you might well be in the wrong religion.

a Christian's faith is never supposed to be so easily upset that one lone guy asking 3 little questions can cause the whole house to fall...
if that were the case, how could you possible hope to stand up against attacks that come from the world of the CULTS?

now come on....the Bible gives us an example, that when it comes to such things as a Bible study "Iron sharpens Iron"
That men are suppose to be able to stand up for their faith and in doing so make their faith more perfect.

We are not to hide our faith under a bed and hope the bad Alan with his hard 3 questions gets tired and goes away......

Thank you.

Because, it is out of order in the first place.

But that order is only compounded if it is being refused.

Why should I concern myself with your questions when you won’t rectify for yourself the specifics of handling God’s word?

You want me to turn a blind eye to follow your insight and dive into the word irreverent of how God said to handle it? And I haven’t even finished with telling of it.

Why? Oh yes, there’s plenty more, but currently we don’t seem to be interested in that. No order for you, just not interested?

Well then I’m not interested in beating the air. What I am interested in at this point is defending the weak as responsible Christians should want to. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Christians being godly watchmen on the wall.

But don’t fret, we all likely realize the limitations of a forum and that they do have parameters of their own, , that being a decorum much less adamant must be remembered also. But don’t expect selective refusal to run rogue indefinitely.

Mike.

[alanmolstad]

You want me to turn a blind eye to ......


Im just asking questions.....


There is no eye-blinding intended here.

Just one guy asking a few questions and looking forward to what answers other people get when they open the Bible for themselves and look for the answers?






But I think I understand what is really going on in your mind here,
I think anyone watching this conversation has figured out what all this reluctance to answer my questions must be based on.

You know Im right about what the Bible says in Genesis.

And I think any honest Bible student is smart enough to have looked at my questions and right away came to the same conclusion about what Im talking about.
That conclusion is that "Alan is right"




Nothing Im saying is my own idea.
This understanding of what the bible actually says compared to what the YEC teachers have been teaching it says has been known for a long time.

I believe you have also known this for a while too..
Your actions, the way you try so hard to try to slide-around the questions I have asked points me to this conclusion about you.



But lets move on,

Lets deal with my 3 questions today , and get to the heart of what Im pointing to by asking them, and why the believers in Young Earth Creationism are clearly so afraid to address my questions in an honest way?


Over the years I have asked the same basic questions to people that believed I was wrong, and if they are a true believer in the YEC teachings, they will always try to dodge-around my questions..

Always...

They never want to allow themselves to risk opening their Bibles and giving me an honest answer
And why do I think this is so?..........the answer is, They don't want to take the Red Pill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE7PKRjrid4

They are concerned that the moment they open their Bible and attempt to answer my question honestly with only the Text they will forever know in their hearts that what Im saying is the truth.

They are afraid to see the real truth about the story of Genesis, because they also know that must mean that YEC is a lie that has worked it's way into the church and blinded people to what the Bible actually says.

[BigJulie]

In the genesis account, is the earth created as a dead, dry world as taught by science?.....or was the earth created with seas already covering the land?

Genesis chapter 1 and chapter 2 give different accounts of this.

Genesis 1-- In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.... And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

(After this, on the 6th day-man was created.)

Genesis 2--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,
And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

There are some who believe that Moses took two different accounts and combined them which is why it seems different from chapter 1 to chapter 2.

In the end, if you blend the two, then earth was created first (ground, dirt) and then water second. In fact, in chapter 2, it appears that first the ground was created, then seeds were planted, and then the earth was watered--much like we would make a garden.

[alanmolstad]

I'm out in my shop right now working with the coal forge...but in a bit I will take a break and post...

[alanmolstad]

Im so cold right now...I can hardly type my fingers are so cold.
i was outside working and it was snowing....thats how cold it is here.

So I may have to warm up a bit before I get too deep into how Genesis 1 works with genesis 2...

But the short answer is that there is no disagreement between Genesis 1 and 2...
However Genesis 2 does drop back in the story and fill-in a few important details in the creation story.

genesis 2 does carefully set the stage here,when it talks about the time setting of the story its going to be dealing with.

its a time in the creation week that was " when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.


so we know we are going to be dealing with a moment in the story that comes after Genesis 1:1...for it says "when they were created"...so the Heavens and the earth are created.
as we have already learned, the term "heavens"refers to the stars, like our own sun, so we are going to be dealing with a point in earth's history that comes after the creation of the sun and stars, and the earth as well...

then the text adds, " Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth[a] and no plant had yet sprung up,


lets drop back and find out when plants were created ?

Genesis 1 : 11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation:
And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

So now we know we are going to be dealing with a point in the creation story that comes before day 3...


Next it says-
"or the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth"

when is the first listing of water on the earth in the genesis story?
"darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.



So we are now getting a clear idea that we are going to be talking about a moment in earth's history that happens after the earth was created, but before the "waters" talked about in Genesis 1:1 had appeared...

So this is going to be very early in earth's history.



Now as I said, Genesis 2 is a part of the story that drops back to fill-in some important details of the story that have not been shown yet.
One such thing now is listed and it has to do with the "waters" that were talked about at genesis 1

We are now going to learn where the "waters" came from that covered the earth at the start of the genesis story.

but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground

So now we learn that the water that covered the earth at the start of the story actually came from inside the earth.
The translation i posted here says the words "streams" but another correct wording is "a mist"




So Genesis 1 and genesis 2 are in agreement...with genesis 2 filling in details that we need to more clearly understand the full story.

[alanmolstad]

So what does it all mean?

The answer is, that the Bible is teaching us that the earth was created as a dead and dry world....and that all the water on the earth came from underground.

and this is where the water talked about at genesis 1:1 (the deep, the waters) came from.





and oh by the way, this is in agreement with where science tells us water came from too by the way....
So there is nothing here so far that stands against science.

[BigJulie]

So what does it all mean?

The answer is, that the Bible is teaching us that the earth was created as a dead and dry world....and that all the water on the earth came from underground.

and this is where the water talked about at genesis 1:1 (the deep, the waters) came from.





and oh by the way, this is in agreement with where science tells us water came from too by the way....
So there is nothing here so far that stands against science.

Your point? I have never disagreed with science and the Bible being congruent. But if it wasn't--this would not matter as well. Science isn't infallible and the Bible is not explicit on exactly how the earth is created. We are not given the details.

[alanmolstad]

oh,,,I hope I did not make it seem like I thought you disagreed with science...

But trust me....others, even within my own church family ,do strongly feel that science disagrees...
Most of my comments are aimed at such a issue.....

Im actually relieved to understand your position now more clearly.

[alanmolstad]

in the opening of Genesis we read that there was "darkness" on the earth...
Well tomorrow I will address the question of why the earth was in darkness if we know at the start of the story God had already made the sun and stars.

Why was the earth in darkness if there was a sun burning bright in the sky


We will learn what the bible teaches as to why this happened.

[MichaellS]

Let's suppose that I am a person reading the bible and I read Isaiah 53, I read John 3:16, I read Romans 10:9-10, I read Ephesians 2:8-9.
I read other scripture and realize by conviction of the Holy Spirit that I am a sinner and need a savior. By what I have read and believed in
the scriptures and by the measure of faith and grace I receive from God, I confess my sins, repent and receive Christ as my Savior. I have
been led to salvation by the truth of scripture.
Now suppose I am the same person reading the book of Genesis, the same true scriptures that led me to eternal life. I have no science
book, no copy of Darwin's Origin of Species. What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape for
"all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

Hello Disciple.

For those who rejoice in the truth by faith knows none at all. For those who teach this even to be considered, fall into a condition of worse than no scripture at all. For those who submit themselves to seduction don’t lead, would rather not have to deal, and don’t understand that way of faith, but would rather put portions of II Timothy 3:16 to fable rather than the rugged fact of truth.

Love leads us to “endure” the scope of God’s will. (I Cor 13:7)

Glory to God!

Mike.
.

[alanmolstad]

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.


I will now be going over this "darkness" talked about at Genesis 1:2 and giving to you the Bible's reasons for why the earth is said to be in this Darkness.

Lets first take this slow, and find out what we just read and what it means?


2 Now the earth " So at this point, the earth is already created, its real.



was formless .the word suggests a foggy murkiness to the form of the earth.
So the earth is very real, its a solid world, but for some unknown reason its form is hard to see...
The example I give my Bible students, is that you are on a road in a thick fog, and you hear a large truck coming at you.
You hear it drawing closer and closer,you know the truck is very real,but you cant see it yet.





and empty, this words means simply uninhabited ...so no people yet.



darkness was over the surface of the deep, the words "the deep"can only refer in the bible to a large body of water...so this tells us that the earth has great seas, and is perhaps totally covered by water at this point in earth history.
We will get to this word "darkness "in a moment.
But what we have now seen is the writer of our genesis story getting us all up to speed as to the true setting he paints for the rest of the story.






and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.>...this is perhaps the most important part of the early Genesis story , for it gives the reader the POV,the Point Of View of the witness to the events that are about to be talked about in the story.

The POV we are to take is that of the Spirit of God, who is said to be "hovering"over the water.

This is very important, for it informs us how to view all the rest of the genesis story.
Far too many of us read the Genesis story from the mental POV of a spaceman ,looking down at the earth from the Space-station.

Thats an error.

The Bibles POV is an earthly POV.
We are to take the POV of the Spirit Of God that is hovering just over the top of the water that covers the whole earth.


Now that we understand what the Bible has taught us about the story so far,and the POV we areto have in our minds as we read on, ,we are now ready to look at the question, "Why was the earth dark if the sun was already created at genesis 1:1?"

[alanmolstad]

the "darkness" found at the start of the genesis story is caused by the thick clouds talked about at *** 38


Its that simple.







it was dark over the waters at the start of the genesis story only because there were very thick clouds at the time.
As the clouds thinned, you were able to see the difference .
First you would notice the difference between Day and Night.
Then you would notice the moon
and then finally as all the thick clouds thinned out you would notice lastly the dim lights of the stars in the night sky.


thats all that is being talked about happening on Day 4

[alanmolstad]

the "darkness" found at the start of the genesis story is caused by the thick clouds talked about at *** 38


Its that simple.







it was dark over the waters at the start of the genesis story only because there were very thick clouds at the time.
As the clouds thinned, you were able to see the difference .
First you would notice the difference between Day and Night.
Then you would notice the moon
and then finally as all the thick clouds thinned out you would notice lastly the dim lights of the stars in the night sky.


thats all that is being talked about happening on Day 4
.....and thats the way it is....

[alanmolstad]

the "darkness" found at the start of the genesis story is caused by the thick clouds talked about at *** 38


Its that simple.







it was dark over the waters at the start of the genesis story only because there were very thick clouds at the time.
As the clouds thinned, you were able to see the difference .
First you would notice the difference between Day and Night.
Then you would notice the moon
and then finally as all the thick clouds thinned out you would notice lastly the dim lights of the stars in the night sky.


thats all that is being talked about happening on Day 4
.....and thats the way it is....

[alanmolstad]

I should really collect all my posts on this topic and put it into a book!
I believe I have helped a lot of people understand how to read the creation story and to see that there is nothing in the Text that is actually against science or evolution.

[disciple]

I should really collect all my posts on this topic and put it into a book!
I believe I have helped a lot of people understand how to read the creation story and to see that there is nothing in the Text that is actually against science or evolution.

Perhaps when you write that book you will have a chapter where you finally answer many of the good,
reasonable questions that have been directed to you, such as;

Let's suppose that I am a person reading the bible and I read Isaiah 53, I read John 3:16, I read Romans 10:9-10, I read Ephesians 2:8-9.
I read other scripture and realize by conviction of the Holy Spirit that I am a sinner and need a savior. By what I have read and believed in
the scriptures and by the measure of faith and grace I receive from God, I confess my sins, repent and receive Christ as my Savior. I have
been led to salvation by the truth of scripture.
Now suppose I am the same person reading the book of Genesis, the same true scriptures that led me to eternal life. I have no science
book, no copy of Darwin's Origin of Species. What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape for
"all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

[alanmolstad]

Perhaps when you write that book you will have a chapter where you finally answer many of the good,
reasonable questions that have been directed to you, such as;

Let's suppose that I am a person reading the bible and I read Isaiah 53, I read John 3:16, I read Romans 10:9-10, I read Ephesians 2:8-9.
I read other scripture and realize by conviction of the Holy Spirit that I am a sinner and need a savior. By what I have read and believed in
the scriptures and by the measure of faith and grace I receive from God, I confess my sins, repent and receive Christ as my Savior. I have
been led to salvation by the truth of scripture.
Now suppose I am the same person reading the book of Genesis, the same true scriptures that led me to eternal life. I have no science
book, no copy of Darwin's Origin of Species. What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape for
"all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".
I think you forgot the part with the ending question mark - "?"

The use of a question mark will make it a lot more easy for me to understand what question or issue you want me to address...

[disciple]

I think you forgot the part with the ending question mark - "?"

The use of a question mark will make it a lot more easy for me to understand what question or issue you want me to address...

"Now suppose I am the same person reading the book of Genesis, the same true scriptures that led me to eternal life. I have no science
book, no copy of Darwin's Origin of Species. What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape?"

[alanmolstad]

What scripture would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape[/COLOR] for
.....

again, I think you might want to review what i have said...

Have I ever said that evolution is "taught" in the Bible?


no?

Then what have I said then?

Only this: That the text of Genesis tells a story that works with and walks hand-in-hand with science and the teachings of evolution.



How does it do that?
The answer is to look at the text and ask yourself, "Where is life from?"


The answer you get is that all life on this earth is from the earth itself. *
We are part of this earth that has come to life.
The final point of origin, the place where we are 'from" is the earth.

This is true for both humans, as well as the great apes.

There is no difference in our starting point , and the starting point of any of the animals.
We all share a common origin point, and common starting point where we all came forth from.



This is true in Genesis, as it is true in Evolution!


The starting point matches....the starting point is held in common between evolution and genesis.


Now when you put this agreement with science, next to the agreement with science we see in how the earth was created and how it is said to happen in Genesis, you find that there is nothing at all to get upset about when teachers of science and evolution come in to the church to teach on our origins...

For all that we see currently taught in science has no disagreement with what the Bible teaches us about that same time in early earth's history...



So if the science behind evolution is not being disagreed with by the Bible, then I dont feel the need to disagree with it too!



Case-closed....




* Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth ...
12 And the earth brought forth...
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth...
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

[disciple]

again, I think you might want to review what i have said...

Have I ever said that evolution is "taught" in the Bible?


no?

Then what have I said then?

Only this: That the text of Genesis tells a story that works with and walks hand-in-hand with science and the teachings of evolution.



How does it do that?
The answer is to look at the text and ask yourself, "Where is life from?"


The answer you get is that all life on this earth is from the earth itself. *
We are part of this earth that has come to life.
The final point of origin, the place where we are 'from" is the earth.

This is true for both humans, as well as the great apes.

There is no difference in our starting point , and the starting point of any of the animals.
We all share a common origin point, and common starting point where we all came forth from.



This is true in Genesis, as it is true in Evolution!


The starting point matches....the starting point is held in common between evolution and genesis.


Now when you put this agreement with science, next to the agreement with science we see in how the earth was created and how it is said to happen in Genesis, you find that there is nothing at all to get upset about when teachers of science and evolution come in to the church to teach on our origins...

For all that we see currently taught in science has no disagreement with what the Bible teaches us about that same time in early earth's history...



So if the science behind evolution is not being disagreed with by the Bible, then I dont feel the need to disagree with it too!



Case-closed....




* Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth ...
12 And the earth brought forth...
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth...
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Aside from what your personal opinion is, can you answer this question yes or no? Is there any scripture that would suggest or lead me to believe that man evolved from an ape?

[alanmolstad]

Again, the Bible does not teach evolution...

but then again, nor many other teachings of science or stuff like that...LOL


But what you find true is that what the bible does say actually works with evolution and the teachings of science..

So while it might not teach some concept of modern science, you also dont find the Bible teachings against science.

This then is shown in the Bible verses i listed at the bottom of my post above.

the listed bible verses are there to show you the answer to your question , for they show us that the text of the Bible does trace back humans and the great apes to a common source.

[alanmolstad]

its kinda the "round-and-round " that I see on this topic all the time.

i try to tell people at the start that the Bible, "Does not teach evolution, it just teaches ideas that work well next to evolution"

and yet I always get back, "Show me where the Bible teaches evolution?"

[alanmolstad]

there are many things that are not talked about in the Bible...there are many topics the Text of the Bible does not address...

But just because the Bible does not clearly address an issue, this should not be understood as meaning that the Bible was 'against" such ideas.


The teachings of evolution came about over time and are the product of lots and lots of study on this earth's life.
So its silly to open the Bible and think that the text will clearly address some point of science that was not discovered until hundreds if not thousands of years after the scriptures were written.

But we also should understand that while things like "science" and "religion" are products of men's study, the "Universe" and the "Bible" are products of God's mind.


So men can raise and ask many questions in the world of science and religion that are not addressed in the Bible at all.....
There is no limit to the topics that you can not find a clear teaching on in the Bible.....thats just a given.


But what we do find in the Bible does agree with what we find in the universe.
This is because both the Bible and the universe have the same creator...the same mind behind their creation.


And so I dont think any Christian should become all "crazy and upset" at the idea that Evolution walks with Genesis, after all if Evolution is true, one would expect there to be such agreement right?

[alanmolstad]

so to review:

According to the teaching of Evolution, all life (Both human and animal) can be traced back to the final source...and that source is the Earth itself.

The story of Genesis teaches the very same thing.

[alanmolstad]

http://cosmicfingerprints.com/genesis1/

[Christian]

you may be on to something. All the more reason to fight the swindlers in the Answersingenesis crowd.

And exactly WHAT makes them 'swindlers?' WHO did they swindle out of WHAT? WHEN and WHERE?

Instead of casting such disparagement, perhaps you could CITE something specifically?

BTW the 'solid dome' theory is completely speculative and has NO SUBSTANTIVE SUPPORT anywhere.

[Christian]

My own view on the issue is that while Genesis is not a book teaching science, it none the less tells a religious story that works within the teachings of science and evolution.

We don't find evolution taught in the story of Genesis, but then again, we don't find any anti-evolution arguments in the story as well.

So in the end, I maintain that evolution and Genesis are like friendly neighbors, in that each is their own property yet they get along with their neighbor and together form a very nice relationship in the heart of the believer.

Neither do we find anti arguments against man being hatched from a duck egg. . .but that is not a reason to believe man hatched from a duck egg either.

Your argument from absence fallacy is clear.

The problem with evolution is that it is merely a THEORY, cannot be shown to be replicatable in science, and NEVER shows one species 'morphing' into a new or improved species. The theory is too badly flawed to be considered intelligently, and if you believe it you must do so on the basis of emotions.
Evolution requires DEATH to PRECEDE God's creation of Man. That is a 100% contradiction to the Biblical account.

[alanmolstad]

[COLOR=#0000cd]Neither do we find anti arguments against man being hatched from a duck egg.thats my point...


For so long I have heard from the Young Earthers that the teachings of Evolution are "against' what the Bible says..
But the truth is, there is nothing in Genesis that actually stands 'against' evolution at all.

So this means there is no reason for some of my brothers to get all crazy and do name-calling against people like myself who have come to see that the proof behind evolution is sufficient and that there is squat in the bible against it..

So we dont see any problem with evolution at all.


The Bible does not teach "against" the evolution of life including man.

What the Bible does teach, is that man came forth from the earth.
We see this teaching over and over in the Bible.

This same teaching is also at the heart of evolution.

So while evolution itself is not talked about in the Bible what we do find talked about is a story that walks with evolution.

[disciple]

thats my point...


For so long I have heard from the Young Earthers that the teachings of Evolution are "against' what the Bible says..
But the truth is, there is nothing in Genesis that actually stands 'against' evolution at all.

So this means there is no reason for some of my brothers to get all crazy and do name-calling against people like myself who have come to see that the proof behind evolution is sufficient and that there is squat in the bible against it..

So we dont see any problem with evolution at all.


The Bible does not teach "against" the evolution of life including man.

What the Bible does teach, is that man came forth from the earth.
We see this teaching over and over in the Bible.

This same teaching is also at the heart of evolution.

So while evolution itself is not talked about in the Bible what we do find talked about is a story that walks with evolution.

So Alan I ask again, show one verse in the Bible that would cause a person to come to the conclusion that man evolved from an ape.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness". 2Tim 3:16

Those who would learn the things of God, and be ***ured of them, must know the Holy Scriptures, for they are the Divine revelation. What Darwin wrote was not divine revelation. The Bible is profitable for all purposes of the Christian life. It is of use to all, for all need to be taught, corrected, and reproved. There is something in the Scriptures suitable for every case including Creation, God did not need The Origin of Species to explain Genesis.

[alanmolstad]

So Alan I ask again, show one verse in the Bible that would cause a person to come to the conclusion that man evolved from an ape.

.

If you drop back and read post number #146 you will see my answer to your request.


Its why so many times this topic never is allowed to go anywhere except round and round.

I try my best to tell people that "The Bible does not "teach" evolution, rather it has no anti-evolution arguments within it's text."


Yet it's like Im talking to a blank wall for the first question I always seem to get is "Show me where the Bible teaches evolution"?



I just dont know how else to say it...my skills at posting are at their limit Im afraid. I dont know how else to say what it is I see and do not see taught in the bible !


All I can say is what I have already said, many, many, many times before.
That is?....

That is the following,


In the Bible we learn that all life is from the earth

In the Bible we learn that huimans are from this earth

In the Bible we learn that animals and humans share a common starting point.

In the Bible we learn that the common starting point of all life is this earth.




And in Evolution we learn that this is all also true as well.






and...
In the Bible we don't read any words that stand against evolution, nor do we see any anti-evolutional arguments made.




So the conclusion is this:
That both Evolution and Genesis are able to walk hand-in-hand with the other without issue.

[alanmolstad]

If you drop back and read post number #146 you will see my answer to your request.


Its why so many times this topic never is allowed to go anywhere except round and round.

I try my best to tell people that "The Bible does not "teach" evolution, rather it has no anti-evolution arguments within it's text."


Yet it's like Im talking to a blank wall for the first question I always seem to get is "Show me where the Bible teaches evolution"?



I just dont know how else to say it...my skills at posting are at their limit Im afraid. I dont know how else to say what it is I see and do not see taught in the bible !


All I can say is what I have already said, many, many, many times before.
That is?....

That is the following,


In the Bible we learn that all life is from the earth

In the Bible we learn that huimans are from this earth

In the Bible we learn that animals and humans share a common starting point.

In the Bible we learn that the common starting point of all life is this earth.




And in Evolution we learn that this is all also true as well.






and...
In the Bible we don't read any words that stand against evolution, nor do we see any anti-evolutional arguments made.




So the conclusion is this:
That both Evolution and Genesis are able to walk hand-in-hand with the other without issue.

So if you read my post above and yet still think you are going to post the same question about "Alan show me where the Bible says we evolved from apes?" you can just save both out times and repeat my answer above to that question.

and if you feel compelled to keep asking that same question over and over, then please also feel free to post my answer in response to that same question as many times as well...

[alanmolstad]

For so long I have heard from the Young Earthers that the teachings of Evolution are "against' what the Bible says..
But the truth is, there is nothing in Genesis that actually stands 'against' evolution at all.

So this means there is no reason for some of my brothers to get all crazy and do name-calling against people like myself who have come to see that the proof behind evolution is sufficient and that there is squat in the bible against it..

So we dont see any problem with evolution at all.


The Bible does not teach "against" the evolution of life including man.

What the Bible does teach, is that man came forth from the earth.
We see this teaching over and over in the Bible.

This same teaching is also at the heart of evolution.

So while evolution itself is not talked about in the Bible what we do find talked about is a story that walks with evolution.

[Hardt]

Sometimes I suspect that the earth is created by aliens.

[DrDavidT]

How can science gather evidence for a supernatural act and then examine the creative act? You cannot put a supernatural act in a scientific bottle. In other words, science is useless when it comes to our origins.

[disciple]

In Matthew 19:4 Jesus said “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female".
Jesus doesn't leave any room for "evolving" from apes, the "theory" is satans attempt to eliminate the need for a Creator.

[alan]

what was man before that?

What does the Bible say was man before they were male and female?


The answer is how we find that when the Bible is talking about does fit with what science and evolution is also talking about.

Go read what the Bible says man was before they were male and female....

[disciple]

God made man from the dust of the earth, ok God made man from the elements he had already created. That doesn't sound
like evolution nor does this,"And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man." Gen 2:21-22
Does that sound like it took God millions of years? I see no mention of any apes here either.

[alan]

God "formed" the man out of the earth itself.

We humans are a part of this earth that has come to life.
We share this fact with the animals....for the animals also are said to come forth from this earth in both evolution and in Genesis.

Now the criticism that the words in the text don't "sound" exactly like the way modern science teachers describe the science of evolution is silly...

Im not saying that the teachings of evolution are found in the Text,,,

However, what I am saying is what we read in Genesis works hand-in-hand with the teachings of evolution,

and that Im also pointing out that there are no words in the Text of Genesis that stand "against" the teachings of evolution.

So we have two works that talk about the same point of time in earth's history that are describing the same events but only in different ways, but yet in agreement with each other and without contradiction.

[alan]

now as for the idea " I see no mention of any apes here either." , here is the answer -

According to the teachings of evolution, what came before the rise of humans and apes?...

and what was before that?

and before that?
and before that, and that, and that?

Follow the chain of life according to the teachings of evolution and go back to the very beginning, the very "origin" of the first building blocks of pre-life?

Where do you end up?.....
The answer is in agreement with the Text of Genesis, for you end up with all life , (both human and the animals) coming forth out of this very Earth itself!


(To confirm this for yourself, just check the text at Genesis 2:19 and Genesis 3:19)

The starting point is the same in Genesis and evolution.

Thus in the end we get to the same point in total agreement.

[disciple]

Hi Alan,

Where does the bible talk about a "chain of life", that's a man made concept. The scriptures say
that God created beasts and cattle and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind.
It doesn't even hint that any creature came from some other kind. Cattle were created as cattle
fish as fish and men as men. Sorry, no room for years of death and mutations for creatures and man to evolve.

[alan]

Just take a look at the teachings of Evolution and with them trace back all life to its source.
Where does all life come from according to evolution?...

The answer is the same answer we get at Genesis 2:19


So what does this mean for us?...it means that there is no contradiction at all between the strory found in Genesis and the teachings of evolution.
Both works are able to walk hand in hand with each other.