| FAQ |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#133
03-16-2009, 11:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Shalom, Tandi |
|
#134
03-24-2009, 01:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Come on in, the water's fine!
About time I weighed in and let another voice be heard.
At first I was a non-gapper, then I heard this other theory, and since apparently so many professed Bible-believers taught it, I figured it was worth thorough investigation, since I could have been wrong. Especially since Ruckman teaches it, I figured I'd better get to the bottom of the matter. I am endebted to Kent Hovind for letting me borrow from his knowledge; I have every seminar, class, debate, rebuttal and book the brother ever did, and have gone over his material profusely. Now I MUST state that in no way do I follow that man's teachings, but as a good little Berean, I searched out almost all the interesting topics Kent ever brought up, (which were many), including this gap theory. One of my good Bible-believing friends and I have been involved in a discussion about this gap theory, and at first I knew only Hovind's succint, detailed, thorough and plausible explanation (which some here misrepresent). But when this friend started trying to explain the other side, using a few of the main arguments often repeated for the gap, I decided to investigate deeper. I've read this entire thread carefully, and throughtfully, as well as the other threads that touch on it. I've read both Ruckman's and Hovind's sides, as well as others. I've sought the Lord's guidance on it, and have asked various brothers I come across. The outcome of my personal research has led me back to a firm, scriptural and logical conclusion that there is NO gap in Genesis. I've given sincere thought to everything the pro-gappers have presented, and watched as the non-gappers have perfectly refuted each and every meaty point, not to mention the scripture wresting, the accomodation of long-age pseudo-science, the bad logic, the weak scriptural arguments, the appparent requirement to make the theory work. The non-gap conclusion doesn't have to bend anything, agrees perfectly with scripture, and the "without form and void" I have seen easily refuted in many ways. Also, YEC agrees perfectly with all true science. I noticed nobody got much into the extreme fallacy of the pseudo-science that claims to prove the earth is older than ~6000 yrs. That's a whole other topic, that is resolutely, soundly and comprehensively explained in Hovind and other's work, as well as backed up by hard impirical evidence. Now, many of the comments made in this thread I felt compelled to respond to but didn't, and Winman has been doing a great job in responding to most of them. I'm afraid that once someone gets stuck in a heresy, and have commited much of their effort to trying to back it up, the harder it gets for that person to see the truth. Like a pastor who's spent years fighting againsts the KJB and its proponents, will have a far far harder time admitting he was wrong, even if he does see the light. I for one, spent over a year honestly unsure on this gap theory, seeking information from both sides, but have come to the logical conclusion. The non-gap explanation makes perfect sense for everything; the geological evidence of a ~6000 year old planet / universe (plus all related topics); the fall of Satan occuring after man was living sinless in the Garden of Eden; each and every scriptural reference to the creation, the flood, the fall of man, and the futurs of creation, man and angels. There is only ONE argument that I have ever heard a gapper present that I can't reconcile, and I ask you non-gappers out there if you have an answer: God's System of Sevens, by Ruckman. He presents seven stages of the earth / world, in that God's various plans of perfection are always done in sevens. Now, possibly this one doesn't have to confirm to the system of sevens, for there are many other exceptions to that pattern. Or perhaps Ruckman has them out of order somehow. Now, I don't find that this presented pattern alone can prove a gap/recreation, but could only support it. since that pattern doesn't have to be true, as it is only conjecture based on observed patterns, without a direct scripture indicating that the world will pass through seven states of being. Anyways, there are many more things on this topic I'd like to talk about, mostly in favor of non-gap, but that is one sincere puzzle I'd like to have solved. Notable Quotable: Did you know that we live in a single spoken sentence? Uni-verse |
|
#135
03-24-2009, 04:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
BABB514
Hope you don't mind me shortening your name. First, thanks for the compliment, but I am really a very simple Bible believer. And to me, that is important. Although we are told to study diligently and rightly divide the word, I also believe that much of scripture is straightforward and simply understood. I believe that God brought about the King James Bible so that the common man could study and know God's Word. And this is one of my biggest problems with the Gap. If the Gap is true, then no person anywhere can truly understand the Bible. If there was a world that existed between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 that God failed to mention, who is to say that there are not many other stories between verses that God failed to mention? It turns the Bible into a book of mystery that no man can understand. So, while some may not think it an important issue, I think it is very important. And it is the same story basically that those who do not believe in the KJB are trying to tell us. They try to tell us that no person anywhere has God's complete and infallible word. No one can know for sure. You might be reading God's word, you might be reading man's word, who knows?? As concerning the number seven, I personally believe the world to be around 6000 years old at present as many others believe. And I believe Jesus is coming to set up His Millenial Kingdom very soon. I am not a date picker, but I think it possible the Lord will come around 2018, as that is 70 years from the re-establishment of Israel as a nation in 1948. I AM NOT PICKING DATES. I AM SAYING IT IS POSSIBLE ONLY. Mark 13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. 27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. 28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near: 29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors. 30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. 29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; 30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. 31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. 32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Now, maybe I am misunderstanding these scriptures, but I have thought that Christ's coming might be within one generation (70 years) of Israel's re-establishment as a nation. And maybe I am wrong about this, but I think there could be one thousand years for each day of the creation week. So, there could be six thousand years since creation, then the Lord will come and set up his one thousand year kingdom to match up with the seventh day that God rested on. 2 Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the Now, verse 8 has been misued by many, and perhaps I am incorrect here also. But look at the context. It is talking about the Lord coming. But it starts with the creation week "the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water". And then, God says that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. So, perhaps there are six thousand years from the creation until Jesus comes, and then the thousand year Millenium. If so, Jesus should be coming very soon. |
|
#136
03-24-2009, 07:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
quoted
If there was a world that existed between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 that God failed to mention, who is to say that there are not many other stories between verses that God failed to mention? It turns the Bible into a book of mystery that no man can understand The book of revelation never mentions the body of Christ. many falsely assume the churches in 2-3 and 22:11 are the Body of Christ. There is not just something missing between verse is found but something missing between 1:1 and 22: and 22:20 of the whole book. and to the remark that the angels were created and fell in the six days to the fall of Adam has no biblical proof also. here we have silence again. you have to change the the KJV word of God to put them in as part of the starry host on day 4 or a silent creation on day 2 or 3 so they can sing with joy. The word beginning in verse one is not a representation of 24/7TQ but just a word that represents a starting point for men who are in a 24/7TQ for we do not understand what eternity is yet or its TQ. 24/7 TQ is established on day one. My observation through all of Scriptures is that those created beings, things and places not mentioned in the Bible, i.e. the deep, water, fire, cherub, cherubim, seraphim's, angles, the lake of fire, God's throne and an altar on a set of Seraphetic wheels as found in Ezekiel, or the tabernacle pattern shown to Moses, Lucifer's creation and fall, the horses which are in heaven and were not created here on earth that even the Lord and all the saints come back on, and the Day in which all the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD (when was that and how long had that been going on). All of it was created and took place outside the current 24/7TQ. or if you like before the 6 day creation and just because God doesn't tell us anything of these things is not for us to question for it is his will we don't know. You see there are lots of things God is silent on in the Bible as to where things, beings, places came from or when they were created or started. let us be honest and not make such dogmatic statements that are proven false by God's Preserved word. |
|
#137
03-25-2009, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Chette
I am not going to keep arguing with you. If Satan or Lucifer fell before Gen 1:2 it contradicts Gen 1:31 and Exo 20:11 Gen 1:31 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 Exo 20:11 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. Where you get this 24/7TQ thing is beyond me. Time began when God said, IN THE BEGINNING. That's when time began Chette, in the beginning. The word "beginning" does not even have meaning without the concept of time. And I know of no verse that says God used a different time between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. Frankly, I am amazed you can believe your own theory. |
|
#138
03-25-2009, 06:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But Exodus 20:11 contradicts you. Exo 20:11 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. You talk about Earth being re-created (without scripture), but Exo 20:11 says God also made Heaven in the six day creation. So, you have a new problem. Did God also re-create Heaven? And verses you use to support your theory is Job 38:4-7. You say this proves Satan and the angels were created in this timeless period (an oxymoron if ever there was one) before Gen 1:2. Lets look at Job 38:4-7 and see if there was time. Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Wast- past tense When- past tense Laid- past tense Hast- present tense Hath- past tense Laid- past tense Knowest- present tense Hath- past tense Stretched- past tense Fastened-past tense Laid- past tense When- past tense Sang- past tense Shouted- past tense There sure are a lot of references to time in these verses you use to support your theory that there was no time. 
|
|
#139
03-25-2009, 07:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Now you never remarked on the false statement you made concerning God creating things that are not mentioned in scriptures? you know you were wrong in making such a dogmatic statement as that. there are plenty of things God has created that are not mentioned in the Bible and if he is silent on them then why would he not be silent on a pure earth perfect in creation and in full light of his glory before verse two of Genesis?
The all that is in them statement is in silence at best concerning the creation of Angelic beings. therefore is not conclusive that it included Angles, Cherubs, Cherubim and Seraphim's. these beings exist out side the heavens you and I see. This statement has its limit and that is all that is within the firmament of which he created to contain all his creations during the 6 days. on our 7th day he rested nothing took place. on the eight day the serpent comes and spoils their parade on the ninth they are kicked out of heaven. now it may not be clear as to those actual days. but how long does it take for man to be tempted? 1 week? one year? man doesn't need even one minute to be tested. some of you want to put Adam sinless in a garden for many days or years before he was tempted. but there is no need for that. it would only bolster that man is good enough to have made it many days or years before he fell. that there is something naturally outside of sin nature in man. look at Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. this is the New Jerusalem he is talking about. there is not TQ and they are under the same requirement as Adam keep the commandments. the next verse tells us those who don't are dogs, sorcerers, whoremongerers, murderers, idolaters and liars these are people who had failed to keep the commandments. how long did it take after the City was set upon the earth? I tell you only a few hours to prove they can not keep one commandment. As far as the our current situation God has never gone beyond our current 24/7 TQ in dealing with men in any form of fashion. He has chosen to limit himself to it and all his dealing with man are within those bounds. You would have beginning inside the 24/7 or outside the 24/7? The term beginning is inspired to give you and idea of a starting point not a starting point. however you must understand and it is plainly written in the scriptures that the 24/7TQ did not exist nor was not established until day one. Eternity has no staring point and no ending point it always is and always will be. But for you and I we have and exist in a 24/7 TQ that God created for us specifically on day one as written in verses 3-5 not in the beginning of verse 1. Verse one is in eternity Verse 3 onward through all of scriptures until Rev 21:11 is in a 24/7TQ. If you deny that the 24/7TQ was created and established in verses 3-5 on day one you are showing disbelief in God's word. Days of 24 hours did not exist before that. this is why Peter and the Psalmist agree that a day to God is not a 24 hour period but longer. But for us a day since verse 3 they have been made 24 hour days. Now if Seraphim's were made after the first day of the six day creation. you would have God go without a wheeled throne and without the covering Cherub until after day 4 of the 6 day creation. which I doubt very seriously. He already had a throne and it is the one Lucifer wanted to replace with his throne, being his only that he was the architect of one that existed on the earth in eternity before verse two of Genesis. |
|
#140
03-25-2009, 07:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
You are showing you know very little about our TQ. Our language was created in our TQ and for our understanding we would use word in a past tense. But how far past tense are they. just to day 3 of creation or to verse one before day one? YOu have no proof that Verse one is the same as verse 3-5 in time.
Again you have the earth created before the Angelic beings could have sung at the foundations thereof fastened. this verse speaks of when the earth was placed in it place in the heaven. you have no scripture to clearly show when the angelc beings were created you use a verse from silence and claim that is what it teaches. but you want to point out I have not scriptures for what I say but you are doing the same. for someone who doesn't want to argue you sure are doing a great job at it. I am trying to keep this at a discussion level but your remarks are starting to (not that they clearly are) be spotted with personal attacks. Be careful on how passionate you get over an area of least importance spiritually. |
|
|
Linear Mode
