Few people doubt that the Bible intends to teach that the creation is young. The genealogies of the Old Testament are actual reproductions of the calendar system used in most ancient times. Posted on 02/07/2014 3:11:21 PM PST by fwdude
Genesis 1:1
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
Just when was the “beginning” when God created the heavens and the earth, as spoken of in Genesis 1:1? In these days when scientists talk about “billions” of years, the question of what the Bible says on the matter of origins becomes even more important.
Few people doubt that the Bible intends to teach that the creation is young. The genealogies of the Old Testament are actual reproductions of the calendar system used in most ancient times.
While the subject is very complicated, we can share with you the calculations done by some well-known Christians. You are probably familiar with Bishop Ussher’s calculation that creation took place in 4004 B.C. But did you know that no less than the great scientist Kepler calculated that creation took place in 3877? Martin Luther calculated that creation took place in 3961 B.C. The very oldest ages arrived at through calculations based on Scripture say the creation is about 7,500 years old.
For the Christian, the question of the age of the creation can only be answered on the basis of Scripture. There is no question that Scripture gives us more than enough information to conclude that the creation is young and that God wants us to know it. After that, it is simply a matter of whether we accept Scripture’s authority.
Prayer:
Dear Heavenly Father, help my thinking not to be conformed to this world, but help me to be transformed by Your renewing of my mind so that my faith in Your clear Word is unshakable. In Jesus’ Name. Amen.
Notes:
Painting: Archbishop James Ussher, painted by Peter Lely (1618–1680).
“Ken Ham explains it perfectly”
I do not need Ken. I have Genesis in Hebrew, Jewish history, and the complete Bible. That is sufficient.
but you dont believe what you just posted
“The question for the conspiracy theorists would be: Why 750,000? Why not fool mankind by a factor of 75,000, or 750, or 75?”
Chutzpah?
It’s clear that the Bible doesn’t give an age for the Earth.
“but you dont believe what you just posted”
I do. I don’t believe you have a rubric to understand my position (which others hold as well). Your posts to me are reactive.
I understand your position better than you. Try to understand mine better than me, or you are in no position to discuss. If you are not ready to have a serious conversation - and that is fine with me - just let it go.
I responded to your thread originally to simply say not every believer in Christ sees the formulation you put forth as the only option.
1:1–2. These verses have traditionally been understood as referring to the actual beginning of matter, a Creation out of nothing and therefore part of day one. But the vocabulary and grammar of this section require a closer look. The motifs and the structure of the Creation account are introduced in the first two verses. That the universe is God’s creative work is perfectly expressed by the statement God created the heavens and the earth. The word bārā’ (“created”) may express creation out of nothing, but it certainly cannot be limited to that (cf. 2:7). Rather, it stresses that what was formed was new and perfect. The word is used throughout the Bible only with God as its subject.But 1:2 describes a chaos: there was waste and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. The clauses in verse 2 are apparently circumstantial to verse 3, telling the world’s condition when God began to renovate it. It was a chaos of wasteness, emptiness, and darkness. Such conditions would not result from God’s creative work (bārā’); rather, in the Bible they are symptomatic of sin and are coordinate with judgment.
Moreover, God’s Creation by decree begins in verse 3, and the elements found in verse 2 are corrected in Creation, beginning with light to dispel the darkness. The expression formless and empty (ṯōhû wāḇōhû) seems also to provide an outline for chapter 1, which describes God’s bringing shape and then fullness to the formless and empty earth.
Some have seen a middle stage of Creation here, that is, an unfinished work of Creation (v. 2) that was later developed (vv. 3–25) into the present form. But this cannot be sustained by the syntax or the vocabulary.
Others have seen a “gap” between the first two verses, allowing for the fall of Satan and entrance of sin into the world that caused the chaos.
It is more likely that verse 1 refers to a relative beginning rather than the absolute beginning (Merrill F. Unger, Unger’s Commentary on the Old Testament. 2 vols. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981, 1:5). The chapter would then be accounting for the Creation of the universe as man knows it, not the beginning of everything, and verses 1–2 would provide the introduction to it. The fall of Satan and entrance of sin into God’s original Creation would precede this.
Ross, A. P. (1985). Genesis. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 1, p. 28). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
Notes for Genesis 1Notes for 1:1
1 tn The translation assumes that the form translated “beginning” is in the absolute state rather than the construct (“in the beginning of,” or “when God created”). In other words, the clause in v. 1 is a main clause, v. 2 has three clauses that are descriptive and supply background information, and v. 3 begins the narrative sequence proper. The referent of the word “beginning” has to be defined from the context since there is no beginning or ending with God.
sn In the beginning. The verse refers to the beginning of the world as we know it; it affirms that it is entirely the product of the creation of God.
But there are two ways that this verse can be interpreted:
(1) It may be taken to refer to the original act of creation with the rest of the events on the days of creation completing it. This would mean that the disjunctive clauses of v. 2 break the sequence of the creative work of the first day.
(2) It may be taken as a summary statement of what the chapter will record, that is, vv. 3–31 are about God’s creating the world as we know it.If the first view is adopted, then we have a reference here to original creation; if the second view is taken, then Genesis itself does not account for the original creation of matter. To follow this view does not deny that the Bible teaches that God created everything out of nothing (cf. John 1:3) – it simply says that Genesis is not making that affirmation.
This second view presupposes the existence of pre-existent matter, when God said, “Let there be light.” The first view includes the description of the primordial state as part of the events of day one.
The following narrative strongly favors the second view, for the “heavens/sky” did not exist prior to the second day of creation (see v. 8) and “earth/dry land” did not exist, at least as we know it, prior to the third day of creation (see v. 10).
Biblical Studies Press. (2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Ge 1:1). Biblical Studies Press.
"Now let’s return to the first verse of Genesis: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”This is a majestic verse. It is a tremendous verse. I am of the opinion that it is the doorway through which you will have to walk into the Bible. You have to believe that God is the Creator, for he that cometh to God must believe that He is. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
“In the beginning”—that is a beginning which you cannot date. You can estimate it as billions of years, and I think you would be accurate, but who knows how many? Certainly man does not know.
McGee, J. V. (1997). Thru the Bible commentary (electronic ed., Vol. 1, p. 12). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
You choose to contradict the plain evidence of scripture, can't argue with that!
My questions was, then, how do you reconcile Exodus 20:11 with your gap theory?
Do you believe God made light on Day 1, or made it a second time, or what?
Do you believe the land was made after the water?
Do you believe that the Sun Moon and Stars were made on day 4?
This whole line of reasoning is absurd! If there is no night/day cycle, there is no day. If there is no sun to rotate around, there is no year. In fact, from our point of view, without either of these two time clocks, there is no way to measure time, per se. Thus, a day is a day only if it has an evening and a morning, and it always lasts 24 hours, except when Joshua defeated the Amorites in Joshua 10.
Why assert anything else? To fit with radiometric dating time frames? It does not help with light travel from stars, unless you omit Sun Moon and Stars creation on day 4.
“You maintain a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3”
Actually, beteen verse 2 and verse 3. I did not use the word gap. I did say God has not revealed the amount of time that occurred.
“However, Exodus 20:11 clearly states “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them,”which refutes that notion, for it includes the heavens and the earth in the 6 days.”
I agree that verses 3 and following refer to a literal 6 days of creation. If you read the excerpts I posted to RB just before your post, you will have a better idea of why I believe the Hebrew language and structure of the passage lend themselves to the idea without negating God as sole creator, nor the literal 6 day period of creation.
I believe this idea is difficult for people on this thread for a few reasons:
1. They’ve never studied Hebrew language, grammar, structure or Jewish understanding of the same.
2. They are so focused on trying to refute the evolutionists, atheists and godless that they force the Scriptures into a small space.
3. They are so focused on God’s work on Earth that they make all creation about us. It is all about Him.
Having said all that, and posted my views, I encourage you to go back to my very first post where I pointed out that I divide my understanding into opinions, beliefs and convictions. Of the three, I would only (hopefully) be willing to be martyred for convictions. There are very few of those. The first chapter of Genesis teaches clearly that ALL creation came into existence from God - lock stock and barrel. We agree on that. After decades of study, I personally would classify my understanding of this passage at the believe level (I own it, but it doesn’t own me, as a conviction does). Because of this, I do not believe it has anything to do with salvation. It makes for interesting discussion and is important, but I will not die for a particular view of the details.
I know many good, godly Christian men, who have an extremely high view of Scripture, who disagree with the article that heads this thread. They all know the original languages, etc. My point in posting was to show how silly it is to demand everyone believe the exact same thing.
This is all probably more than you wanted to know. In short, I do not believe there is any conflict whatsoever.
best,
ampu
jr,
My understanding agrees with your timeline. I see verses 1 & 2 as a summary statement of what is to follow. Everything God does to customize the earth, starting in verse 3 is as you wrote.
“This whole line of reasoning is absurd! If there is no night/day cycle, there is no day. If there is no sun to rotate around, there is no year. In fact, from our point of view, without either of these two time clocks, there is no way to measure time, per se. “
Ah, the limitations of language. I see this as exactly why I agree with what McGee wrote. Our understanding of time is dependent on days, years, etc. Before there was light, creation and time existed. God was at work. To Him it was all present tense. To read His Spirit “was hovering” implies an action that took place over time. How much time? Without a watch, I don’t believe any human knows.
You can believe whatever you wish. Let each be convinced in his own mind.
This is incorrect. It is belief in JESUS that is required to gain eternal life.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
QUOTE: Immortality is a choice.
Incorrect again. It is a gift of God, not a choice of man. Man is chosen by God, not vice versa.
Romans 6:23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life inb Christ Jesus our Lord.
Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."
I’m curious. Since you apparently disregard Exodus 20:11 that says God created the heavens and the earth in the 6 day time frame, and since you reject evolution and the big bang, what do you gain by putting time between vs 2 and 3?
“I’m curious.”
A good quality.
“Since you apparently disregard Exodus 20:11 that says God created the heavens and the earth in the 6 day time frame”
I agree wholeheartedly with Exodus 20:11 and a 6 day creation. I just believe
“and since you reject evolution and the big bang, what do you gain by putting time between vs 2 and 3?”
Truth is always its own reward. When we come to God’s Word, we want to know what it says and what it means by what it says. This view, in my opinion, not only matches the language and structure God inspired, it appears to better match many facts in creation.
That said, I am not posting to convince anyone that this view is the only correct view. You can certainly trust Christ and have eternal life, whatever you believe about the specifics here.
I posted to demonstrate that the argument in the article that began this thread was false. Many Christians hold a different view that in their opinion better fits the totality of Scripture.
This sentence was eclipsed - perhaps billions of years ago! Sorry.
“I just believe the 6 day creation starts in verse 3.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.