Spirituality
08 Feb 15
06 May 15
3 edits
Originally posted by sonshipYes, you use the expression "unspecified" as to the distance in time from this moment back to the beginning of the universe (Genesis 1:1), however, everyone knows you are an "old earther" who despises the YEC viewpoint. You continually fight to disprove the truth that God created the heavens, the earth, and the seas and every thing in them in 6 literal days so you can hold on to man's theory of evolution and billions of years.You are on very dangerous ground when you seek to integrate God’s truth, as revealed in Scripture, with man’s truth, as currently understood and taught, such as billions of years, from outside the Scriptures.
Your last few posts have been in the tone of dire warnings.
You may always pray for me as I do for you. I am in good hands.
...[text shortened]... l warfare.
To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.
Amen.
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
(Exodus 20:11 KJV)
Then you attempt to twist the words of Jesus in Mark 10:6 by claiming that when He said, "the beginning of the creation" that he did not mean the beginning of all creation that includes man, but to just the making of man which you claim was an "unspecified" time of perhaps millions and billions of years after the beginning of creation of the heavens and the earth.
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
(Mark 10:6 KJV)
I have no objection to your interpretation of Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12-18 as referring to both Satan as the annointed cherub Lucifer as well as the the two human rulers of that time (the king of Babylon and the king of Tyre). However, it in no way means that there are perhaps millions and billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
It is clear from Genesis 3:1 that the Serpent or Dragon is a physical beast of the field that God had made. The fact that the Serpent was able to talk to the woman to decieve her is just proof the Lucifer left his former state to possess the serpents body as the first act of iniquity that challenged the rule of God.
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
(Genesis 3:1 KJV)
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(Revelation12:9 KJV)
We have already discussed what the angels that followed after Satan did to the daughters of men that led to the destruction of the world of Noah's time on another thread. So there is no need to bring that up as some kind of twisting of scripture on my part. There is just no proof in the scriptures of an old earth of billions of years as is require by the evolutionists.
Of course, I believe the theory of evolution is a threat to the truth of the Holy Bible. It is just common sense that the theory of evolution in which there are millions of years of death undermines the truth of the New Testament. And your idea of sin from a pre-adamic civilization and some of the angels in Heaven simply destroys the truth of scripture. If there was sin and death before the tempting of Eve, then there are clearly errors in the New Testament, such as:
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
(Romans 5:12 KJV)
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
06 May 15
3 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, you use the expression "unspecified" as to the distance in time from this moment back to the beginning of the universe (Genesis 1:1), however, everyone knows you are an "old earther" who despises the YEC viewpoint.
I don't despise your viewpoint. When YOU push hard against me I MAY push hard in return BACK.
But I don't "despise" your viewpoint or sincerity. I am ready to defend the Interval and the preadamic fall of Lucifer. And I think some of the questions you ask need to asked.
You continually fight to disprove the truth that God created the heavens, the earth, and the seas and every thing in them in 6 literal days so you can hold on to man's theory of evolution and billions of years.
I don't teach that God did not create the heavens and the earth. And I think Moses meant for us to understand 7 typical days. But I can defend an unspecified gap of time between God creating the universe in the beginning and the six days in which He did some restoring and also some further creating.
I would not encourage anyone to take Genesis 1,2 as an exhaustive scientific explanation of the origin of the world.
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
The word in that passage is ASAH or Made. Some of us believe that MADE does not always carry the same connotation as CREATED.
Critics of this look at it and say "We will call this the Gap Theory."
Others have called it "Destruction / Reconstruction".
You have brought up some complaints. I think I have given reply to why those objections may bother but do not bother to some other Christians.
Then you attempt to twist the words of Jesus in Mark 10:6 by claiming that when He said, "the beginning of the creation" that he did not mean the beginning of all creation that includes man, but to just the making of man which you claim was an "unspecified" time of perhaps millions and billions of years after the beginning of creation of the heavens and the earth.
I reserve the right to believe Jesus in Mark 10:6 and to believe that "the earth was waste and emptiness and darkness was on the surface of the deep" (Gen. 1:2) indicates a divine overthrow of a previous order of things.
If a Christian does not go along with this, I still recognize that one as a brother in Christ. He may even love the Lord more than I do. But this is what I believe along with some very solid saints.
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
My exegesis may not be the best on this passage. But regardless, I reserve the right to believe that God did not create the world waste -
"For thus says Jehovah, Who created the heavens - He is God Who formed the earth and made it;
He established it; He did not create it WASTE, But He formed it to be inhabited. I am Jehovah and there is no one else." (Isaiah 45:18)
That is what we see in Genesis 1. God formed the earth to be inhabited. But He did not create it WASTE. So seeing it "waste and emptiness" (v.2) hints of a destruction. I believe the destruction of a previous economy, kingdom, realm in which the Daystar had vast dominion of some kind.
I have no objection to your interpretation of Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12-18 as referring to both Satan as the annointed cherub Lucifer as well as the the two human rulers of that time (the king of Babylon and the king of Tyre). However, it in no way means that there are perhaps millions and billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
Man was absent from existence. So I think you get into difficulty when you think of the human clock. Whatever that destroyed world was it was not man's world.
Viewing its possibilities through man's eyes may indeed cause you some problems.
It is clear from Genesis 3:1 that the Serpent or Dragon is a physical beast of the field that God had made. The fact that the Serpent was able to talk to the woman to decieve her is just proof the Lucifer left his former state to possess the serpents body as the first act of iniquity that challenged the rule of God.
I have pointed out before to you that on each day God says that what He has done He saw is good except for the second day in which the atmosphere was mentioned.
Day 1 - God saw the light that it was good. (v.4)
Day 2 - SILENCE about the expanse of heaven being "good".
Day 3 - " ... seas; and God saw that it was good." (v.10)
" and God saw that it was good " (v.12)
Day 4 - " ... and God saw that it was good." (v.18)
Day 5 - " ... and God saw that it was good." (v.21)
Day 6 - " ... and God saw that it was good." (v.25)
We believe that the withholding of the pronouncement that the expanse of the immediate heavens was good is intentional. There was something left over from the judgment which was not completely dealt with yet.
And that is the principalities and powers of Satan in the air.
You see God set up a TRIANGULAR situation. He arranged that at the top of the triangle would be God Himself. But on one side would be Satan and on the other side would be Man. The destiny of the creation was in the balance between Satan and God with man in the middle.
God as the Creator would not deal directly with His rebel creature the Satan. This would mean the Creator was dealing with the creature unilaterally. God chose to create a new creature - human beings in His image and likeness. Which way man leaned, whether toward God or toward His opponent Satan, had very much to do with the plan of God.
God would destroy Satan not unilaterally but only with the cooperation of another creature to take his place - man. Rather I should say MORE than take his place but be a very being living in God in a mingled and incorporated way.
God gave this opposing being whatever amount of time it took for his rottenness to be manifested. If that means a million or a billion years, that is some angelic clock time more than human clock time.
And though I would like to write more, I am called away at the moment. Further writing will have to wait.
07 May 15
2 edits
Originally posted by sonshipWhy are you so stubborn and how many times do I have to point out there is no Gap of destruction and restoring in Genesis chapter one? It is all about creating and making physical things in six literal days and setting aside a seventh day of rest so man could remember and contemplate on the wonder of God's creation.Yes, you use the expression "unspecified" as to the distance in time from this moment back to the beginning of the universe (Genesis 1:1), however, everyone knows you are an "old earther" who despises the YEC viewpoint.
I don't despise your viewpoint. When YOU push hard against me I MAY push hard in return BACK.
But I don't "despise ...[text shortened]... h I would like to write more, I am called away at the moment. Further writing will have to wait.
Reserving the right to believe a lie does not turn it into the truth. There is no hints of a destruction in verse 2. It is simply an acknowledgement of the condition of the earth at a point when it was being formed before it was ready for habitation. That is as plain as the nose on my face to someone with common sense.
Surely, many have speculated about the meaning and reason for the waters above and below the firmament that God called heaven or sky, but we might also speculate that it was not declared good at the end of the second day because the waters above the firmament of heaven was destined to be used in the destruction the earth after some angels (sons of God) later took possession of the daughters of men and polluted the earth or for some other reason. However, you must also remember that at the end of creation that all God had made was declared very good.
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
(Genesis 1:31 KJV)
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
07 May 15
6 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsIsaiah 14:12-14
"How you have fallen from heaven, O Daystar, son of the dawn! How you have been hewn down to earth, You who made nations fall prostrate!
But you, you said in your heart:
I will ascend to heaven;
Above the stars of God I will exalt my throne.
And I will sit upon the mount of assembly in the uttermost parts of the north.
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."
RJHinds believes that these are events that happened after Satan in the serpent deceived Eve. In other words the FIRST unrighteous matter found within the Daystar was that of lying to Eve.
I think this is totally wrong. The serpent lying to the humans in the garden had a previous attempt filled with much sin. Those sins consisted in:
1.) wanting to ascend higher than his already appointed exalted position - "I will ascend to heaven"
2.) wanting to be exalted above the stars of God [probably meaning above all the angels] - " I will ascend ... above the stars of God"
3.) wanting tp exalt his assigned seat of government unduly higher than what was assigned to him - "I will exalt my throne .."
4.) wanting to have his seat in the government usurping the ultimate Divine Government - "And I will sit upon the mount of the assembly in the uttermost parts of the north."
The direction north here refers to where God reigns over the universe. IE. Psalm 75:6 -
"For neither from the EAST nor from the WEST, and neither from the SOUTH, does exaltation come; For God is the Judge:
He puts this one down and exalts that one." (Psalm 75:6) [/quote]
The three directions EAST, WEST, and SOUTH are not from where the Divine Judge puts down or exalts. NORTH is replaced by God Himself. So NORTH and " ... the mount of assemply in the uttermost parts of the NORTH" represent the ultimate Governor and Judge Himself God.
5.) wanting to ascend above the heights of the clouds - another symbol of Daystar wanting to rise higher that the position assigned to him.
6.) wanting to make himself like the Most High - "I will make myself like the Most High".
It is impossible for any being to be higher than "the Most High". Here was a creature wanting to be "like the Most High."
All these five " I WILL[s] " of the the Daystar's usurpation and revolt occurred before the scene of the snake lying to Eve in the garden.
So the slandering lie told Eve was not the first of a train of sins of Satan. Rather is was a subsequent and continuation of sins.
Because the Daystar's revolt had failed he and his angels were in abject defeat. In this situation of his seething resentment he slandered God to this new creature Eve.
" ... Did God really say, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden ... You shall not surely die! For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil." (See Genesis 3:1-5)
It is crucial to see that Satan is not tempting Eve to do something that Satan has NOT YET attempted himself. Rather he HAS already attempted to make himself "like the Most High" and failed.
Because of his previous and ancient bitter failure he slanders God and lies, tempting Eve to follow the same FAILED path that he already had taken. This would cause God to forsake man, so he thought, and include man in Satan's company as an addition to his already swollen opposition party.
What do you think readers? In Genesis 3:1-5 was Satan tempting Eve to PIONEER into a rebellion to become like God BEFORE Satan had done so? Or do you believe that he tempted Eve to follow a perverted and sinful path he had ALREADY pioneered himself ?
It is more logical that Satan spoke from previous experience.
Therefore it is not trustworthy to accept RJHinds that Satan's lie to Eve was his FIRST unrighteous act.
07 May 15
Originally posted by sonshipBy talking past me and appealing to others for support you seem defeated on your arguments and have decided it is a good stategy to invite those that you know hate me and will never agree with anything I say to make comments.
[b]Isaiah 14:12-14
[quote] "How you have fallen from heaven, O Daystar, son of the dawn! How you have been hewn down to earth, You who made nations fall prostrate!
But you, you said in your heart:
I will ascend to heaven;
Above the stars of God I will exalt my throne.
And I will sit upon the mount of assembly in the uttermost parts of t ...[text shortened]... e it is not trustworthy to accept RJHinds that Satan's lie to Eve was his FIRST unrighteous act.
It may be possible that you and I may be the only ones that are still following this debate. Did you ever think about that?
07 May 15
Originally posted by sonshipI was not aware we had an audience. So to you this is about gaining followers to your point of view and not understanding the true teachings from the Holy Bible. So "the end justifies the means" is your motto.
A good debate is not about convincing the opponent. It is about convincing an observing audience.
Whatever style of debate you prefer, the points are the points.
07 May 15
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipNow you might be on to something. Perhaps it would help your case if you found a Lutheran Satire on the Gap Theory.
For a lighter moment while RJ recoups for his next objection:
[b]Donally and Connally Meet Richard Dawkins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d4FHHf00pY
Horus Ruins Christmas (Lutheran Satire)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r2m_cffRjI[/b]
Is the 'Gap Theory' absurd?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
08 May 15
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsThat's your job to lampoon this understanding of the rebellion of the Daystar - the Anointed Cherub.
Now you might be on to something. Perhaps it would help your case if you found a Lutheran Satire on the Gap Theory.
Is the 'Gap Theory' absurd?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgItaHuU6CA
On a serious note, I don't intend to convince you. If anyone is undecided and reading along, I am confident that with prayer the Holy Spirit will guide them into what He desires them to believe.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
08 May 15
4 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsI think you have been aware all along on a public forum on which you start thread after thread after thread, that people will read. (And you open quite many).
I was not aware we had an audience. So to you this is about gaining followers to your point of view and not understanding the true teachings from the Holy Bible. So "the end justifies the means" is your motto.
And please don't be so hypocritical as if you are not making an effort to gain "followers" of your opinion on Genesis 1:1,2.
And now since you really seem to have no more substantial points to offer but only subtle ad homs, I think serious students can decide prayerfully, where the more valid ministry on this point probably is.
08 May 15
Originally posted by sonshipYes I know that some people will read and contribute if they are interested in the subject. However, it appears to me that even the ones that showed an interest at first seem to have lost interest for we are the only ones commenting on this subject.
I think you have been aware all along on a public forum on which you start thread after thread after thread, that people will read. (And you open quite many).
And please don't be so hypocritical as if you are not making an effort to gain "followers" of your opinion on [b]Genesis 1:1,2.
And now since you really seem to have no more [i]substant ...[text shortened]... rious students can decide prayerfully, where the more valid ministry on this point probably is.[/b]
I don't want people to follow after me. What good is that going to do anyone? I want them to follow Christ and understand the truth of scripture so we all can be saved.
I am simply defending the truth of scripture from an heretical docrine being added to support the theory of evilution.
HalleluYahshua !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
08 May 15
4 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsI am not supporting evolution.
Yes I know that some people will read and contribute if they are interested in the subject. However, it appears to me that even the ones that showed an interest at first seem to have lost interest for we are the only ones commenting on this subject.
I don't want people to follow after me. What good is that going to do anyone? I want them to follow Chri ...[text shortened]... ded to support the theory of evilution.
HalleluYahshua !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!
I am using the revealed word of God to expose that little snake's history.
He was judged before Adam was created.
His full execution of that judgment is expedited by the building of the church.
"Now the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." (Rom. 16:20)
Praise the LORD!
I do!
08 May 15
2 edits
Originally posted by sonshipThe problem is that you are tying to add millions or billions of years of your imaginary history between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 which is clearly revealed to be be only minutes or hours of time and less than a single day for sure. 😏
I am not supporting evolution.
I am using the revealed word of God to expose that little snake's history.
He was judged before Adam was created.
His full [b]execution of that judgment is expedited by the building of the church.
"Now the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." (Rom. 16:20)
Praise the LORD!
I do![/b]
By the way, adding millions or billions of years to the creation account does support evilution whether you understand that or not.
HalleluYahshua !!! Praise the LORD!
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
08 May 15
7 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsReally Smugface ?
The problem is that you are tying to add millions or billions of years of your imaginary history between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 which is clearly revealed to be be only minutes or hours of time and less than a single day for sure. 😏
Well the passage in Genesis 1:1-3 is definitely alluded to twice at least, in the New Testament. Both times the usage of the passage is not God doing something to a benigh and waiting realm but rather to a realm in which God's enemy's activity has wrought some damage:
1.) John 1:4,5 - "In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not overcome it."
The reference to God commanding "Let there be LIGHT" (Gen. 1:3) is used to demonstrate that the opposing forces of darkness were not able to overcome the light of God.
Men dwell in darkness because of sin.
Though this is the situation God has sent the light of His Son.
The forces of darkening sin are no simply benigh but opposing the Son to keep man darkened.
2.) 2 Cor. 4:2-6 - "And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in those who are perishing.
In whom the god of this age has blinded the thoughts of the unbelievers that the illumination of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine on them.
... Because the God who said, Out of darkness light shall shine, is the One who shined in out hearts to the illumination of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."
Here too, the allusion to Genesis 1:3 is employed not to picture a benigh, potential positive thing, waiting - only unformed, to come about. Rather there is an negative force working to blind God's people to the light of truth in Christ.
While this may not prove a pre-adamic fall it does suggest the New Testament writers are employing (under inspiration) God's command to shine in the darkened earth of waste and emptiness in the way of teaching about God overcoming the Devil's damage.
HalleluYahshua !!! Praise the LORD!
I do.