- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Proclaimer. You still didn’t answer the question. What did God do to “separate light from darkness”?
See, God not only said, “Let there be light”, but He also “separated the light from the darkness”.
What process or action by God SEPARATED the light from the darkness once the atmosphere cleared and the light finally reached the surface of the Earth?
For example, the Earth was not rotating at first, and the separation of light from darkness was because God started the Earth rotating?
Do you see what I’m saying now? What exact action did God take, or what natural process occurred, to separate the newly arrived light from the darkness that was covering the Earth?
Think for a minute Mike. Do I really need to hold your hand through this. Surely you can put the pieces together? Maybe not then. Lol. I will bear with you.
In the Heliocentric model, you have an earth revolving around the sun. So one half of the planet is in darkness and the other half in light at any given time. (God created the firmament and the earth right). So with a choked atmosphere, you have just darkness on the surface of the earth despite this. Think of Venus if you are struggling to imagine it.
So as the atmosphere clears up <-,
light gets to finally shine onto the surface and now we have an actual day / light. How does the atmosphere clear up? Not sure. Less eruptions perhaps, maybe water condensing and precipitating into the sea and thinning out the atmosphere? You’ll have to ask God about that.Suffice to say, that we know that the Spirit of God hovered over the waters and land appeared etc. We are not given the detail on how. The thing is, that science pretty much comes to the same conclusion, but attempts to answer the details which Genesis does not.
Yet, I cannot verify if science exactly matches what God actually did, partly explains it correctly, or got it wrong, but still came to the same conclusion of events.
Have you ever travelled east or west?
Obviously yes.
Could you then kindly tell me where west is on the Flat Earth.
I can see North and South is the ice wall around the perimeter as you say.
So where is west?
Hi Mike,
You: Hi Proclaimer. You still didn’t answer the question. What did God do to “separate light from darkness”?
ME: “THE WORD” MADE FLESH JESUS, AS THE ONLY SPIRIT/MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD’S PERFECT WORK PRECISELY
“THE LIGHT” AND CORRUPTED EVIL WORK PRECISELY “DARKNESS”.
See, God not only said, “Let there be light”, but He also “separated the light from the darkness”.
What process or action by God SEPARATED the light from the darkness once the atmosphere cleared and the light finally reached the surface of the Earth?
For example, the Earth was not rotating at first, and the separation of light from darkness was because God started the Earth rotating?
Do you see what I’m saying now? What exact action did God take, or what natural process occurred, to separate the newly arrived light from the darkness that was covering the Earth?
Me ALL THE ABOVE IS TOTALLY YOUR MISCONCEPTION AND UNDERSTANDING!
Genesis 1:3 And God said: Be light made. And light was made. 4And God saw the light that it was good; and he divided the light from the darkness. 5And he called the light Day, and the darkness Night; and there was evening and morning one day.
Mike, just answer please,
WHAT CONVINCED YOU THAT THE ABOVE IS ONLY A REFERENCE TO THE PHYSICAL LIGHT,
AFTER ALL, IF IN ACTUAL FACT IS, OF WHICH FROM MY SIDE IS ONLY
SPIRITUAL!
THE BEGINNING OF CREATION!
DEFINITELY BY GOD’S OWN LIGHT/WISDOM!
A REFERENCE TO
“THE WORD” JESUS, AS A SPIRIT, THE BEGINNING OF CREATION AND OF ALL GOD’S WOR, BY WHICH TASK
“THE WORD” MADE FLESH, JESUS, PHYSICALLY, CAME INTO THIS PLANET,
A PLANET CRAMMED WITH DARKNESS AS
THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD!
John 12:35 Jesus therefore said to them: Yet a little while,
the light is among you.
Walk whilst you have the light,
that the darkness overtake you not.
And he that walketh in darkness, knoweth not whither he goeth.
36Whilst you have the light, believe in the light,
that you may be the children of light.
These things Jesus spoke; and he went away, and hid himself from them.
46 I have come into the world as light,
so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness.
Mike, please get this into your CARNAL-MINDED MENTALITY and understand, that unless you look at scripture from
THE SPIRITUAL SIDE OF IT YOU WILL REMAIN TALKING ONLY,
NONSENSE! PLUS THAT YOU NEVER SEE GOD’S SPIRITUAL WORK!
THE TRUTH! WITH EVERY RESPECT!
IN THE SAME WAY, PEOPLE IN MOSES’ TIME WERE!
peace and love in Jesus Christ
To all
The Early Church on Creation
by Dr. James R. Mook on October 18, 2007; last featured August 20, 2015Featured in Answers MagazineWhat did the early church believe about creation?
In its first 16 centuries the church held to a young earth. Earth was several thousand years old, was created quickly in six 24-hour days, and was later submerged under a worldwide flood.
A Young Earth According to . . .
The Church Fathers
The Church Fathers (AD 100–600) were theologians after the apostles. Based on Scripture, they opposed naturalistic theories of origins. Some, including Clement of Alexandria (c. 152–217), Origen (c. 185–254), and Augustine (c. 354–430), interpreted Genesis 1 allegorically. To them, the six days were a symbolic presentation of God’s creation in one instant.Progressive creationists, such as Hugh Ross in the book The Genesis Debate: Three Views on the Days of Creation, claim Augustine as a precedent for interpreting the Bible’s reference to “six days” as a symbol for eons of creative activity (known as the framework hypothesis).1 But it is unfair for progressive creationists to make their case using Augustine. Augustine believed the earth was created instantaneously, not progressively, and was, according to Scripture, less than 6,000 years old.
Most of the Church Fathers interpreted Genesis 1 in a plain and straightforward way, as actual history. The six days were 24-hour days. Ephraim (Ephrem) the Syrian (306–373) and Basil of Caesarea (329–379) argued for the literal sense of Scripture against the distortions of allegory. Basil said twenty-four hours fill up the space of one day. Even Ambrose of Milan (330–397), mentor of Augustine, believed each day consisted of twenty-four hours, including both day and night. In addition to this, the Fathers believed that the earth was less than 6,000 years old.
Medieval Theologians
Medieval (AD 600–1517) theologians, until later years, followed Augustine. They viewed creation as instantaneous, and the six days as a literary framework. An example is Anselm of Canterbury (c. 1033–1109).Bede (c. 673–735) moderated Augustine’s view. He believed creation had occurred instantaneously but was formed over six 24-hour days. Others, such as Andrew of St. Victor (c. 1110–1175),
rejected Augustine’s view and interpreted Genesis 1 literally.
The medieval church continued to believe that creation was sudden, not gradual, and occurred fewer than 6,000 years in the past. As interpreters began returning to a literal reading of Scripture, they began restoring the literal view of the days of creation.
Reformation Leaders
The Reformation leaders (AD 1517–1700) believed the Bible is the final authority (sola scriptura). The Reformers rejected allegorization and returned toward a literal, grammatical-historical interpretation. Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564) argued that the earth was created in six 24-hour days, fewer than 6,000 years in the past.Luther said, “We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago.” He also rejected Augustine’s view and said that “Evening and morning became one day” meant that Moses was “speaking of the natural day, which consists of twenty-four hours.”
Calvin believed that God’s creation was completed not in a moment but in six days. He concluded, based on Genesis 1:5, that God Himself took six days to accommodate His works to the capacity of men. Creation occurred little more than five thousand years in the past, not innumerable ages.
The Westminster Confession (1647) clearly affirmed that God created the world and all things in it “in the space of six days” (chapter 4, paragraph 1). “In the space of six days” was based on Calvin’s Genesis 1:5 comment. In Annotations upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (the Westminster Annotations, 1645), the Westminster authors specified concerning Genesis 1:5 that in the latter part of the verse, the word day is the natural day, consisting of twenty-four hours. This Presbyterian Confession, with its traditional view of creation, was also adopted by British and American Congregational and Baptist denominations.
A Global Flood According to . . .
The Church FathersThe Fathers believed that the Flood submerged the entire earth. For example, Justin Martyr (c. 100/110–159/165) and Augustine said that the Flood rose 15 cubits above the highest mountains. Theophilus of Antioch (c. 115–168, 181) argued, against Greek local flood theories, that the water overtopped every high hill by at least 15 cubits.
Medieval and Reformation Leaders
The belief that the Flood was worldwide continued in the medievalera. Its chief theologian, Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–c.1274), said that “the waters of the deluge” rose “15 cubits higher than the mountain summits.” And in the Reformation, Calvin said, “And the flood was forty days, etc. Moses copiously insists upon this fact, in order to show that the whole world was immersed in the water.”
After the Enlightenment, the Flood and geology were linked in the age of the earth debate. But very early, Tertullian (c. 150–225) said that the global Flood explained why in his day marine conches and tritons’ horns (both shell creatures) were found high in the mountains.
Conclusion
The traditional young-earth Christian concept of creation stands against progressive creationists, who argue that the earth was created in stages over eons of time. The Greek and Latin Fathers and the Reformers stood on biblical authority against old-earth theorists of their times. Eastern Orthodoxy based its views on the Greek Fathers and so also held to traditional biblical young-earth creationism.2Not until the Enlightenment did professing Christians begin to reinterpret Genesis to fit with alleged scientific proofs of an old earth. But Genesis meant what it meant when it was written, and its meaning was discerned by Jesus and the apostles—and the church that they founded. So we must return to a plain and straightforward understanding of the Genesis account and believe God created quickly, several thousand years ago, in six 24-hour days.
God bless
@t8 @mikeboll64
Hi Proclaimer and Mike,
I have a question for both of you:
Can “gravity” be proven?
If not then our earth can’t possibly be a globe!@dannyd, you can google what gravity is, so there is no reason for me to define it for you. I will just add my 2 cents worth about gravity that I understand.
- Sir Isaac Newton came up with the theory. He is arguably the greatest scientist who ever lived. But he actually dedicated most of his academic life to bible study. I read somewhere than he wrote more about the bible than any man in history. Newton was a genius who loved God and used science to discover how God made things.
- Newton was young when he decided that he would answer a list of questions before he died. He answered all those questions before his life ended. One of those questions was about gravity and another levity. It was thought gravity was a force that made apples fall to the ground. Levity was an opposing force that made things float. Newtown realised they were the same thing and the math predicted whether an object would fall, float, go up, or whatever.
- Newton didn’t really know what gravity was (he couldn’t visualise it) , but came up with math that worked out basically why apples fall from trees and planets go around the sun, and why a bullet takes a particular path. His math is still used today for a whole host of things like launching rockets into space.
- Gravity then is like math. Just as 1+1=2. F=Gm1m2 / r2. It always adds up that way no matter what. It works. As for Newton, there were a few instances where his theory didn’t work, but Einstein made a correction on Newtown’s work and solved this problem.
- Newton invented calculus because there was not a branch of mathematic that could explain his theory for others to understand.
- Truth is never wrong. Gravity predicts things with accuracy. The truth always adds up. Gravity adds up. Have you ever heard of a lie predicting things 100% or always being right. A broken clock is correct twice a day, but tells lies the rest of the time. Gravity is always correct as far as we know. Of course, there is quantum physics which is alien to things at our scale. So I am talking about the things that we can observe in the physical universe. The atomic world is a different kettle of fish. So, it doesn’t matter if it is a moving stone, rocket, planet, star, galaxy. It never miscalculates when applied correctly.
- Visualizing or interpreting what gravity is still up for grabs though. But even if we argue that it is it a force or the fabric of space, we can apply the law of gravity to moving bodies and get the correct answer.
- Think of water. A fish might see water like we see space. Space seems like nothing to us which could be similar to water being nothing to a fish. Yet both work the same way as they are an actual thing or fabric or substance. If you put a tennis ball inside a bucket of water and then spin the ball, the water will follow in the direction of the spin of the ball. Just like the atmosphere spins with the earth or the earth spins around the sun. The larger the object, the bigger the influence in the fabric of space. Now put a ping pong ball in the bucket of water with the spinning ball. What happens to the ping pong ball. It goes into orbit around the larger ball. Why? Because the larger ball has dragged the water around itself and thus the ping pong ball goes around the larger ball because the tennis ball influences the water. Same with the sun which is the tennis ball. Earth is the ping pong ball. This is basically how Einstein visualized gravity working.
- Whatever gravity is, you can calculate the path of objects based on their mass etc. Denying gravity is a bit like denying that 1+1=2. Both math and gravity always work whether you actually understand what is going on or not. The calculations and predictions are true.
- Flat earthers talk about buoyancy. Of course, buoyancy is a thing. But buoyancy relies on gravity.
Flat Earthers of course just deny or do not understand that gravity is useful just like addition or subtraction is useful in determining or predicting things. But Flat earthers accept that there is up and down but have no math to make predictions or a visualisation as to what caused thing to fall down. They just accept that there is up and down. Let’s call their version of gravity, downity. Some flat earthers explain downity by saying the disc is flying upward. At least they gave it a good shot, but that apparently causes many problems and doesn’t match observation. Most flat earthers however do not believe this and go for a stationary earth. They just have zero clue about the force of downity. They cannot tell you what makes it work or why things fall down. The best they can do is buoyancy, but showing why that does not fit observation is a different debate. Whereas, gravity works perfectly, just like multiplication and addition.
In the end Danny, you are free to believe the earth is flat if that is what you want. I won’t stop you. But I will debunk you here on Heaven Net for the sake of the readers. This website is about making all things subject to God. Every lie will be exposed and every truth that is good, celebrated. People can take whatever side they want in that mission. I am responsible for myself and influencing people with truth. But I cannot make any decide anything. Ultimately, that is up to each person. They have a free will.
Ancient man or even men from centuries gone by have had less knowledge. One of the signs of the end times is the increase in knowledge and certainly today, we live in the information age.
Men then observe their world and understand scripture from their perspective. If I am in the train doing a continuous 100kmh without acceleration or deceleration, I could argue that the world I observe is moving around me. But if I do a bit of science and leave the train, I soon learn that the train is moving and the rest is still. But if I leave earth, then I realise that the earth is actually moving and perhaps the sun looks like it is still. But if I leave the solar system then i might see the sun doing a circuit around the galaxy.
My point is this. Perspective is not a lie. The sun really goes down in the evening. But scientifically speaking, this effect is the result of us revolving away from the sun and sunrise is revolving toward the sun.
So these ancient beliefs are simply perspective which is not wrong. But because we live in the age of knowledge, we can now look at other perspectives. And these are truth too. Even greater truths.
But when men of God reject greater truth because it offers a new and higher perspective, then at that point I would say that a sort of pharisaical religion has crept in to one’s understanding, and they are in danger of becomng ignorant and if pride kicks in, end up fiercely defending a lie.
If men of faith from a different century had truth reigning in their hearts, then they would accept truth or revelation when it is revealed / discovered. And I think it is wonderful that God allowed us to explore the universe from our own planet and slowly realise the extent of his awesome creation. I stand in awe with the knowledge that man has uncovered in the cosmos. And all the more, I praise God because I see from his works that he is indeed eternal. Even godless men can see the universe and stand in awe. If only they knew that the one who created this amazing universe is far more amazing than his own creation.
As for six or seven days of creation. This is true. But even scripture says that a day is like a thousand years or a thousand years as a day to God. So God is not subject to time as we are, yet why say that he must be subject to his own creation. He created time and all things in his own time. He makes all things wonderful. And the whole point of a morning and evening and light and darkness is that God moves in stages in his own time and he brings order out of chaos and light to overcome darkness.
But from what we know now, we can easily see that on the day that God created plants that they bore seed and flowered. This really debunks the 24 hour period. We can also see that even before the first day concluded that the firmament and earth were created. Further, many believe the sun didn’t even exist for many of these 24 hour periods. How silly. Then we have scripture that says, the day that God created the heaven and earth.
So there is much more going on here than what a Sunday school youth church might teach about creation.
Today we stand on the shoulders of giants and can see and do much more. Many shall to great works because of this. I just think it is a shame when Christians think that the men of old had all the truth and we have lost most of it. Such men are not looking at Christ and the season we are in.
Jesus said it himself. “Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.”
I am of the view that we can do better than these men. They may or may not have done well for their time. That is for God to judge. But we can do better. Therefore, the enemy would have you not believe such and would rather point you to a time when less things were known. A time with less knowledge and opportunity than we have today. It’s not really hard to see why the enemy prefers that option.
Proclaimer and all,
Thé Bible teaches us that God in six days made the heavens, the earth, and the sea, and all that is in them, and he rested on the seventh day: therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and sanctified it.
He could have done it in a split second, because for him, everything is possible…but he didn’t. HE HAS THEREFORE CHOSEN ANOTHER PEDAGOGICAL WAY TO INSTRUCT US IN THE TRUTH.
THE FOLLOWING SIMPLY EXPRESSES WHAT I BELIEVE AND WHAT ANY MAN WHO HAS FAITH IN GOD’S WORD CAN BELIEVE.
GOD BLESS YOU.
Why Did God Take Six Days?
by Ken Ham on July 1, 1987Featured in The Lie: Evolution
Also available in FrançaisWhen people accept at face value what Genesis is teaching and accept the days as ordinary days, they will have no problem understanding what the rest of Genesis is all about.
When one picks up a Bible, reads Genesis chapter 1, and takes it at face value, it seems to say that God created the world, the universe, and everything in them in six ordinary (approximately 24 hour) days. However, there is a view in our churches which has become prevalent over the years that these “days” could have been thousands, millions, or even billions of years in duration. Does it really matter what length these days were? Is it possible to determine whether or not they were ordinary days, or long periods of time?
What is a “day?”
The word for “day” in Genesis 1 is the Hebrew word yom. It can mean either a day (in the ordinary 24-hour day), the daylight portion of an ordinary 24-hour day (i.e., day as distinct from the night), or occasionally it is used in the sense of an indefinite period of time (e.g., “in the time of the Judges” or “In the day of the Lord”). Without exception, in the Hebrew Old Testament the word yom never means “period” (i.e., it is never used to refer to a definite long period of time with specific beginning and end points). The word which means a long period of time in Hebrew is olam. Furthermore, it is important to note that even when the word yom is used in the indefinite sense, it is clearly indicated by the context that the literal meaning of the word “day” is not intended.Some people say the word “day” in Genesis may have been used symbolically and is thus not meant to be taken literally. However, an important point that many fail to consider is that a word can never be symbolic the first time it is used! In fact, a word can only be used symbolically when it has first had a literal meaning. In the New Testament we are told that Jesus is the “door.” We know what this means because we know the word “door” means an entrance. Because we understand its literal meaning, it is able to be applied in a symbolic sense to Jesus Christ, so we understand that “He” is not literally a door. The word “door” could not be used in this manner unless it first had the literal meaning we understand it to have. Thus, the word “day” cannot be used symbolically the first time it is used in the Book of Genesis, as this is where God not only introduced the word “day” into the narrative, but also defined it as He invented it. Indeed, this is why the author of Genesis has gone to great lengths to carefully define the word “day” the first time it appears. In Genesis 1:4 we read, “And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness” called “night.” Genesis 1:5 then finishes with: “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.” This is the same phrase used for each of the other five days and shows there was a clearly established cycle of days and nights (i.e., periods of light and periods of darkness).
A day and the sun
Light was in existence, coming from one direction upon a rotating earth, resulting in the day and night cycle.
But how could there be day and night if the sun wasn’t in existence? After all, it is clear from Genesis 1 that the sun was not created until day four. Genesis 1:3 tells us that God created light on the first day, and the phrase “evening and morning” shows there were alternating periods of light and darkness. Therefore, light was in existence, coming from one direction upon a rotating earth, resulting in the day and night cycle. However, we are told exactly where this light came from. The word for “light” in Genesis 1:3 means the substance of light that was created. Then, on day four in Genesis 1:14–19 we are told of the creation of the sun which was to be the source of light from that time onward. The sun was created to rule the day that already existed. The day stayed the same. It merely had a new light source. The first three days of creation (before the sun) were the same type of days as the three days with the sun. Perhaps God deliberately left the creation of the sun until the fourth day because He knew that down through the ages cultures would try to worship the sun as the source of life. Not only this, modern theories tell us the sun came before the earth. God is showing us that He made the earth and light to start with, that He can sustain it with its day and night cycle and that the sun was created on day four as a tool of His to be the bearer of light from that time.Probably one of the major reasons people tend not to take the days of Genesis as ordinary days is because they believe that scientists have proved the earth to be billions of years old. But this is not true. There is no absolute age-dating method to determine how old the earth is. Besides this, there is much evidence consistent with a belief in a young age for the earth, perhaps only thousands of years.
Incidentally, those who say that a day could be millions of years must answer the question, “What is a night?”
Why six days?
God is an infinite being. He has infinite power, infinite knowledge, infinite wisdom. Obviously, God could then make anything He desired. He could have created the whole universe, the earth and all it contains in no time at all. Perhaps the question we should be asking is why did God take as long as six days? After all, six days is a peculiar period for an infinite being to make anything. The answer can be found in Exodus 20:11. Exodus 20 contains the Ten Commandments, and it should be remembered that these commandments were written on stone by the very “finger of God.” In Exodus we read: “And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God” (Exod. 31:18). The fourth commandment, in verse 9 of chapter 20, tells us that we are to work for six days and rest for one. The justification for this is given in verse 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.” This is a direct reference to God’s creation week in Genesis 1. To be consistent (and we must be), whatever is used as the meaning of the word “day” in Genesis 1 must also be used here. If you are going to say the word “day” means a long period of time in Genesis, then it has been already shown that the only way this can be is in the sense of the “day” being an indefinite or indeterminate period of time, not a definite period of time. Thus, the sense of Exodus 20:9–11 would have to be “six indefinite periods shalt thou labor and rest a seventh indefinite period.” This, however, makes no sense at all. By accepting the days as ordinary days, we understand that God is telling us He worked for six ordinary days and rested one ordinary day to set a pattern for man—the pattern of our seven-day week which we still have today.Day-age inconsistencies
There are many inconsistencies in accepting the days in Genesis as long periods of time. For instance, we are told in Genesis 1:26–28 that God made the first man (Adam) on the sixth day. Adam lived through the rest of the sixth day and through the seventh day. We are told in Genesis 5:5 that he died when he was 930 years old. (We are not still in the seventh day as some people misconstrue, for Genesis 2:2 tells us God “rested” from His work of creation, not that He is resting from His work of creation.) If each day was, for example, a million years, then there are real problems. In fact, if each day were only a thousand years long, this still makes no sense of Adam’s age at death either.A day is as a thousand years
Neither verse refers to the days of creation in Genesis, for they are dealing with God not being bound by time.But some then refer to 2 Peter 3:8 which tells us: “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.” This verse is used by many who teach, by inference at least, that the days in Genesis must each be a thousand years long. This reasoning, however, is quite wrong. Turning to Psalm 90:4 we read a similar verse: “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” In both 2 Peter 3 and Psalm 90 the whole context is that God is neither limited by natural processes nor by time. To the contrary, God is “outside” time, for He also “created” time. Neither verse refers to the days of creation in Genesis, for they are dealing with God not being bound by time. In 2 Peter 3, the context is in relation to Christ’s second coming, pointing out the fact that with God a day is just like a thousand years or a thousand years is just like one day. He is outside of time. This has nothing to do with the days of creation in Genesis.
Further, in 2 Peter 3:8 the word “day” is contrasted with “a thousand years.” The word “day” thus has a literal meaning which enables it to be contrasted with “a thousand years.” It could not be contrasted with “a thousand years” if it didn’t have a literal meaning. Thus, the thrust of the Apostle’s message is that God can do in a very short time what men or “nature” would require a very long time to accomplish, if they could accomplish it at all. It is interesting to note that evolutionists try to make out that the chance, random processes of “nature” required millions of years to produce man. Many Christians have accepted these millions of years, added them to the Bible and then said that God took millions of years to make everything. However, the point of 2 Peter 3:8 is that God is not limited by time, whereas evolution requires time (a very great deal of it!).
Days and years
In Genesis 1:14 we read that God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years.” If the word “day” here is not a literal day, then the word “years” being used in the same verse would be meaningless.Day and covenant
Turning to Jeremiah 33:25–26 we read: “Thus saith the Lord; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them.” The Lord is telling Jeremiah that He has a covenant with the day and the night which cannot be broken, and it is related to the promise to the descendants of David, including the One who was promised to take the throne (Christ). This covenant between God and the day and night began in Genesis 1, for God first defined and invented day and night when He spoke them into existence.There is no clear origin for day and night in the Scripture other than Genesis 1. Therefore, this must be the beginning of this covenant. So if this covenant between the day and the night does not exist when God clearly says it does (i.e., if you do not take Genesis 1 to literally mean six ordinary days), then this promise given here through Jeremiah is on shaky ground.
Does the length of the day matter?
Finally, does it really matter whether we accept them as ordinary days or not? The answer is a most definite “Yes!” It is really a principle of how one approaches the Bible. For instance, if we don’t accept them as ordinary days then we have to ask the question, “What are they?” The answer is “We don’t know.” If we approach the days in this manner, then to be consistent we should approach other passages of Genesis in the same way. For instance, when it says God took dust and made Adam—what does this mean? If it does not mean what is says, then we don’t know what it means! We should take Genesis literally. Furthermore, it should be noted that you cannot “interpret literally,” for a “literal interpretation” is a contradiction in terms. You either take it literally or you interpret it! It is important to realize we should take it literally unless it is obviously symbolic, and when it is symbolic either the context will make it quite clear or we will be told in the text.
If a person says that we do not know what the word “day” means in Genesis, can another person who says they are literal days be accused of being wrong? The answer is “No,” because the person who accepts them as ordinary days does know what they mean. It is the person who does not know what the days mean who cannot accuse anyone of being wrong.
People try to make the word “day” say something else be cause they are trying to make room for the long ages of evolutionary geology. This doesn’t work because these supposed ages are represented by fossils showing death and struggle, and thus you are left with the same old problem of death and struggle before Adam. The Bible clearly indicates that there was no death and suffering before Adam’s sin.
When people accept at face value what Genesis is teaching and accept the days as ordinary days, they will have no problem understanding what the rest of Genesis is all about.
“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” (Exod. 20:11).
When people accept at face value what Genesis is teaching and accept the days as ordinary days, they will have no problem understanding what the rest of Genesis is all about.
Here is one contradiction with your view. There are many more.
These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
Here is a 5 ton ball holding onto water. It is not flying off like FEers make out.
Of course the water is falling down slowly, but that is because of earth’s gravity. But in reality, this ball is spinning hundreds if not thousands of times faster than earth.Try this yourself. Soak a tennis ball in water. Next, spin it once in 24 hours. Is the water flying off?
Remember, no matter how fast the surface of the earth is moving, it is a huge planet and it equates to one revolution every 24 hours. That is actually very slow.
Below is a picture showing how much water the planet actually holds. it is not deep like FEers will have you believe. It is very shallow compared to the size of the planet. It is the lack of understanding on how big the earth is that leads to many exaggerations. Try and picture the earth as the tennis ball and holding this much (proportional) water. And spin it once in 24 hours.
These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
In fact the above statement is the title statement of the second creation account recorded by the Yahwehist in the book of Genesis 2nd chapter which clearly mentioned the God’s name as ‘Yahweh’ whereas the first creation account recorded by the Priestly writer did not mention God’s name but only used ‘Elohim’. The Priestly writer gave importance to the Seventh Day of rest by the end of his creation account. So the six days of creation are of Hebrew normal days which have both evenings and mornings. The same was confirmed in the Exodus and other later books.
Hi Berean,
You: an important point that many fail to consider is that a word can never be symbolic the first time it is used! In fact, a word can only be used symbolically when it has first had a literal meaning.
You: an important point that many fail to consider is…….
Me: This applies also to you Berean, for the simple reason
THAT FOR GOD IT WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT HE KNEW THE TITLE DAY, WHEN HE MENTIONED THIS TO MOSES. WITHIN HIM HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT, AND WHAT EVENTUALLY ADAM WOULD COMMIT HIMSELF TO! SIN.
I MEAN FOR THE EVENTUAL PROCESS OF THE WORLD WHICH OCCURRED AFTER GENESIS 1. AFTER SIN! Genesis 1 DIDN’T INCLUDE SIN YET, BUT SINCE GOD IS ALL KNOWING, HE CREATED OUR PHYSICAL CREATION OF Genesis 1, IN RELATION TO THE EVENTUAL FALL OF ADAM. SO I REPEAT Genesis 1 WAS TOTALLY A DIVINE PROCESS VERY GOOD, WHERE THE TITLE DAY WAS ONLY A REFERENCE TO THE EVENTUAL DAY AFTER THE SIN! BUT NOT ATTRIBUTED TO CREATION AS SUCH, MAN WAS NOT YET IN EXISTENCE DURING CREATION, AND HE WAS NOT SUBJECT TO THE PROCESS OF Genesis 1 YET, FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT
HE HAD TO BE TESTED SUBJECT TO HIS FREE WILL, THE FACT THAT GOD REMOVED ADAM FROM EARTH, AND PUT HIM IN GOD’S PERFECT GARDEN, NOT SUBJECT TO ANY DAY AND NIGHT IN OUR TERMS, AND PRESENTED ALL THE ANIMALS TO ADAM IN ORDER TO NAME THEM HIMSELF, AS PROOF THAT ADAM IN THAT MOMENT IN TIME, THE FIRST LIVING SOUL, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH Genesis 1, YET, AND NOT YET PART OF THIS EARTH, BUT PART OF GOD’S GARDEN WITHOUT ANY DARKNESS, NIGHT, SUN, DAY AND ALL OUR CORRUPTED PROCESS ON ADAM SIN, THE FACT THAT HE WAS THROWN OUT OF THE GARDEN SUBJECT TO DAY, NIGHT, DARKNESS, LIGHT. AND ALL THE REST TOTALLY CURSED!
ONCE ADAM SINNED, HE ENTIRELY NOT ONLY DISTURBED THE PROCESS OF CREATION, BUT HE TOPPLED IT ENTIRELY EVEN SATANIC! THE FACT THAT GOD SAID
cursed is the earth in thy work;
with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the “DAYS” of thy life.
18Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee;
and thou eat the herbs of the earth.
19In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth,
out of which thou wast taken:
for dust thou art,
IN THE ABOVE IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT ADAM TOPPLED HIS STATE ENTIRELY FROM SPIRITUAL FLESH IN GOD’S TERMS TO SATANIC TERMS IN FLESH AND BLOOD!
and into dust thou shalt return.
ALL THE ABOVE WAS INTRODUCED TO ADAM AS SOON AS HE SINNED, AND THE WORLD BECAME THE PROPERTY OF SATAN, DARKNESS!
OBVIOUS WHICH INCLUDED THE “DAY and THE NIGHT” IN OUR TERMS, AND THE GOOD AND THE EVIL, LIFE AND DEATH, AND SO ON, WHICH WERE NOT PART OF
THE PROCESS OF THE GARDEN OF GOD OF PLEASURE!
NOW KEEP IN MIND THAT GOD ALSO SAID THAT
HE CREATED THE EARTH AND THE HEAVEN IN ADAY NOT IN SIX DAYS!
HOW LONG THIS PARTICULAR DAY WAS, MAY I ASK? READ.
Genesis 2:4 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.
WHAT WAS HE TALKING ABOUT?
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Proclaimer
You
Here is one contradiction with your view. There are many more.
These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
Me
No, it’s not a contradiction, because the expression “in the day” simply means “at the time”.
We are not to describe “a day” but “the days” during which God created the heavens and the earth.
This is why the Christian Standard Bible makes it this way:
These are the records of the heavens and the earth, concerning their creation. At the time that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,The same for the Amplified Bible:
This is the history of [the origin of] the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day [that is, days of creation] that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens—AND OTHERS …
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
