Old or New Earth.

[Major]

Okay so, you believe: 'Creation of man is exactly how Genesis describes it in 6 literal 24 hour days.'

And of course in those 6 days God created everything.

And you also back this up with : 'I would say that the human race is indeed only 6,000 years old and the advancement of civilizations (languages, inventions, medical, industry, et cetera) clearly evidence this fact.'

Thus stating your believe in a young Earth.

However, you also state: 'However, I believe that the earth is very old.'

How do you explain how you hold these two contradictory views to both be true at the same time?

Finally someone asked "The question".

You see, Old Earth proponents do not accept evolution in any way. They believe the Genesis account of Creation just as you do. There is no verse in the Bible which causes us to accept a young earth as the only answer. The Bible does not say, "Thou shalt believe in a young earth." The fact is, no verse in the Bible makes any claims as to the age of the earth. All the so-called verses that young earth proponents point to can be interpreted by the reader to mean old or young. Also, the key doctrines of the Bible are not affected by either interpretation.

Nowhere in the Bible does it teach that the earth is young. The Bible does not say "the earth is 6,000 years old." Nor does it say "the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Now just think with me for a second outside of the box. Most people get hung up on a 24 hour day will make a defense of the "days" of creation being literal 24-hour days. Is that the actual case??????

The truth is, there is no claim in the Bible that states the length of these days. The "day" as we know it didn't even begin until the fourth day of creation, when the sun and the moon were created according to all who read those Scriptures. Wouldn't it be hard to firmly and dogmatically stand on the 24 hour day when the Sun and Moon were not hung in the sky until the 4th day????? It is only a question posed to allow us to think for just a moment.

I am not posting these as my opinions but the belief's of those who hold to the Old Earth position. If that is the case, then Is there an undetermied time frame between verses #1 and #2. That is commonly called the "Gap Theory" which I know has come under a lot of pressure in recent years.

Then secondly.........was there a creation before Genesis?

IF there was then that alone would explain the "water" on the earth before the Creation process began in verse #3. It seems to me that there could have been a pre-Adamic creation in which God destroyed with water.

Please.......Please do not say I am adding to the Word of God. I know very well that those words and that teaching is not there. I am only postulating a theory or hypotheses not a doctrine. It doesn't matter how long the period of creation is, God's power is beyond comprehension, beyond anyone else's capabilities, and He remains omnipotent no matter how long creation lasted. I could say “An all powerful God could have created the world in six seconds. Why did it take him six days…he must be weak.” This obviously is not true.

So then, anyone can accept either one of those positions and still accept the 6 day creation account which begins in verse #3.

Thanks for asking!

 

[Christian Guy]

Finally someone asked "The question".

You see, Old Earth proponents do not accept evolution in any way. They believe the Genesis account of Creation just as you do. There is no verse in the Bible which causes us to accept a young earth as the only answer. The Bible does not say, "Thou shalt believe in a young earth." The fact is, no verse in the Bible makes any claims as to the age of the earth. All the so-called verses that young earth proponents point to can be interpreted by the reader to mean old or young. Also, the key doctrines of the Bible are not affected by either interpretation.

Nowhere in the Bible does it teach that the earth is young. The Bible does not say "the earth is 6,000 years old." Nor does it say "the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Now just think with me for a second outside of the box. Most people get hung up on a 24 hour day will make a defense of the "days" of creation being literal 24-hour days. Is that the actual case??????

The truth is, there is no claim in the Bible that states the length of these days. The "day" as we know it didn't even begin until the fourth day of creation, when the sun and the moon were created according to all who read those Scriptures. Wouldn't it be hard to firmly and dogmatically stand on the 24 hour day when the Sun and Moon were not hung in the sky until the 4th day????? It is only a question posed to allow us to think for just a moment.

I am not posting these as my opinions but the belief's of those who hold to the Old Earth position. If that is the case, then Is there an undetermied time frame between verses #1 and #2. That is commonly called the "Gap Theory" which I know has come under a lot of pressure in recent years.

Then secondly.........was there a creation before Genesis?

IF there was then that alone would explain the "water" on the earth before the Creation process began in verse #3. It seems to me that there could have been a pre-Adamic creation in which God destroyed with water.

Please.......Please do not say I am adding to the Word of God. I know very well that those words and that teaching is not there. I am only postulating a theory or hypotheses not a doctrine. It doesn't matter how long the period of creation is, God's power is beyond comprehension, beyond anyone else's capabilities, and He remains omnipotent no matter how long creation lasted. I could say “An all powerful God could have created the world in six seconds. Why did it take him six days…he must be weak.” This obviously is not true.

So then, anyone can accept either one of those positions and still accept the 6 day creation account which begins in verse #3.

Thanks for asking!

These are your statements of belief:

1. 'Creation of man is exactly how Genesis describes it in 6 literal 24 hour days.'

2. 'Most people get hung up on a 24 hour day will make a defense of the "days" of creation being literal 24-hour days. Is that the actual case??????'

3. 'I would say that the human race is indeed only 6,000 years old and the advancement of civilizations (languages, inventions, medical, industry, et cetera) clearly evidence this fact.'

4. 'The Bible does not say "the earth is 6,000 years old.'

I did ask before: "How do you explain how you hold these two contradictory views to both be true at the same time?" but instead I just got more contradictory views.

You also say; 'It seems to me that there could have been a pre-Adamic creation in which God destroyed with water.'

No, the reason why the water was there is simply because God created it.

 

[Fish Catcher Jim]

A Friendly Reminder
No Matter What
We are to conduct ourselves as True Children of God With His Spirit Living in us.

So through your posting in this thread, which of the following Best Describes Your Behavior and Actions?

But the fruit that the Spirit produces in a person’s life is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.
So ask yourself what spirit am I operating under when I post?
Be at peace and type through Love
Blessings
FCJ

 

[Major]

These are your statements of belief:

1. 'Creation of man is exactly how Genesis describes it in 6 literal 24 hour days.'

2. 'Most people get hung up on a 24 hour day will make a defense of the "days" of creation being literal 24-hour days. Is that the actual case??????'

3. 'I would say that the human race is indeed only 6,000 years old and the advancement of civilizations (languages, inventions, medical, industry, et cetera) clearly evidence this fact.'

4. 'The Bible does not say "the earth is 6,000 years old.'

I did ask before: "How do you explain how you hold these two contradictory views to both be true at the same time?" but instead I just got more contradictory views.

You also say; 'It seems to me that there could have been a pre-Adamic creation in which God destroyed with water.'

No, the reason why the water was there is simply because God created it.

If I was confusing please forgive me. It was not my intent. As I posted.....
"I am not posting these as my opinions but the belief's of those who hold to the Old Earth position. If that is the case, then Is there an undetermied time frame between verses #1 and #2. That is commonly called the "Gap Theory" which I know has come under a lot of pressure in recent years."

Now when you look down at the very end on that post you find................
" It seems to me that there could have been a pre-Adamic creation in which God destroyed with water."

I am not saying that there was, only that it was a possibility IMO.

You are correct. God could have created it...no doubt. My only thought was that the creation process as recorded in chapter 1 did not begin until verse #3.

I enjoy your thoughts and the discussion!

 

[Christian Guy]

If I was confusing please forgive me. It was not my intent. As I posted.....
"I am not posting these as my opinions but the belief's of those who hold to the Old Earth position. If that is the case, then Is there an undetermied time frame between verses #1 and #2. That is commonly called the "Gap Theory" which I know has come under a lot of pressure in recent years."

Now when you look down at the very end on that post you find................
" It seems to me that there could have been a pre-Adamic creation in which God destroyed with water."

I am not saying that there was, only that it was a possibility IMO.

You are correct. God could have created it...no doubt. My only thought was that the creation process as recorded in chapter 1 did not begin until verse #3.

I enjoy your thoughts and the discussion!

I do feel like we are making progress.

I think we have covered the fact that Jesus died in order to conquer death that came in through the fall and that death did not exist before that time?

And we have covered the fact that a day consists of one evening and morning.

I'm still not sure where you believe the extra millions of years come into the sequence of events?

To be honest I am confused by the number of contradictory statements you have made. Perhaps I'll just leave it with you and God. Sometime it just needs time for the Holy Spirit to reveal things but I have enjoyed talking with you about this.

 

[Major]

I do feel like we are making progress.

I think we have covered the fact that Jesus died in order to conquer death that came in through the fall and that death did not exist before that time?

And we have covered the fact that a day consists of one evening and morning.

I'm still not sure where you believe the extra millions of years come into the sequence of events?

To be honest I am confused by the number of contradictory statements you have made. Perhaps I'll just leave it with you and God. Sometime it just needs time for the Holy Spirit to reveal things but I have enjoyed talking with you about this.

Well lets see what we can do for you. Please know I am know being contradictory and if so I am very sorry.

Again, I am only trying to tell you and others what Old Earth believers accept creation as a creation account.
Young earth believers teach that the earth is Young, only 6000 years old. The problem there of course is the fossils which are much older than 6000 years old.
In fact the city of Jericho is said to be 7500 years old.
That is what the Old Earth theology addresses.

Old Earthers say that Creation would have begun after Gen. 1:2.

Before that .........they believe that there may have been an undeterminable amount of years between verse 1 and verse 2.
That has always been referred to as the "Gap Theory".

OK. That is the end of that. Are you still with me?????????

Now then, another thought apart from that is the belief that there was a pre-Adamic earth which could be billions of years old. That is not an Old Earth teaching but is something altogether different. The teaching came from those who saw the "water" in verse #2 which is present before creation begins. The water seen in Gen. 1:2 according to that teaching would be the water left over from the judgment of that world.

Those are two competing thoughts and neither one may be correct. It is only theories that are out there in the world of Christian teachings.

Now, either one of those positions account for the presence of dinosaur fossils which have been found and dated at being millons of years old.

No matter which one is acceptable, the creation process by God would still be the Genesis account in chapter 1 beginning at verse #3 which is seen as a 6 day event..

I hope that clears it up for you. If not, ask again what the problem is and I will try some more.

 

[Abdicate]

Good point. However I posted in comment #52,
"I would also add that "Darkness was upon the face of the deep" indicates the absence of God of course."

Actually, the darkness is conceilment, not the absence of light. God's first act was to create energy and no energy. That is, to create positive and negative. The "without form and void" is just that, building blocks were chaos, without shape, and empty, why? Because there was no energy. That's what the Spirit did in verse three. The "without form" is like a construction sight with all the material laying around. The building was "without form" and it was "void" that is, empty of existance. But once the Holy Spirit "brooded" (the meaning of moved upon the waters - which is literally urine or semen, analize that meaning!) and stired up the elements of the universe until God spoke and the energy ignited, visible and invisible energy. I see the whole process as God setting up the pieces needed to execute creation, implementing time, and defining space. A bucket of legos, that once assembled turns into a train set, as an analogy. Can God be absent when the whole universe is within the palm of His hand.

 

[Major]

Actually, the darkness is conceilment, not the absence of light. God's first act was to create energy and no energy. That is, to create positive and negative. The "without form and void" is just that, building blocks were chaos, without shape, and empty, why? Because there was no energy. That's what the Spirit did in verse three. The "without form" is like a construction sight with all the material laying around. The building was "without form" and it was "void" that is, empty of existance. But once the Holy Spirit "brooded" (the meaning of moved upon the waters - which is literally urine or semen, analize that meaning!) and stired up the elements of the universe until God spoke and the energy ignited, visible and invisible energy. I see the whole process as God setting up the pieces needed to execute creation, implementing time, and defining space. A bucket of legos, that once assembled turns into a train set, as an analogy. Can God be absent when the whole universe is within the palm of His hand.

Blessing to you and Good points all and I do not disagree at all.

I am not expert but when you say............"and stired up the elements of the universe until God spoke and the energy ignited, visible and invisible energy."---
that sounds like what the "Big Bang" believers say.

And then none of what you said says that the earth is only 6000 years old, in fact is seems to me that you are saying the opposite.

 

[Abdicate]

Blessing to you and Good points all and I do not disagree at all.

I am not expert but when you say............"and stired up the elements of the universe until God spoke and the energy ignited, visible and invisible energy."---
that sounds like what the "Big Bang" believers say.

And then none of what you said says that the earth is only 6000 years old, in fact is seems to me that you are saying the opposite.

I look at it like this, put a very small sharpy dot on a new balloon and then blow up the balloon. What happens to the dot? It expands and thins out so it turns a bit grey instead of jet black like when you drew it. From God's perspective the dot is our universe. Since science observes that the galaxies are getter further apart - expanding, they reversed it and calculated a beginning. To help simplify and fill in the missing information, they called it the "Big Bang Theory". Either way, I see it as a win for the word of God because until the 1950's(?) scientists thought the universe was eternal without boundaries. Now, they know better. Ever since then they keep proving the word of God true (not that it's needed obviously) but they are learning about God's creation. Why do you think the current theory is that aliens seeded us humans? Because they know God exists, and since evolution is a joke and they know it, they've moved from "billions and trillions of years" to "billion and trillions of light years" claiming someone else did all this. Well, where did "they" come from? See the circular argument? They can't disprove God's existence, so they're now looking for aliens to answer their questions - anything except God. Why is that? Because if God exists, then God is correct, and they're in their sins.

So I don't take their theories to heart, I just think, "would that work in the word of God if remotely accurate". As I see it, the more we learn about creation, it unlocks some more understanding about the word of God. When scientists could see beyond the atom into quarks and muons, they saw more, and more, until they literally - and this is their words - only whisps of energy exists. Guess what that is? It's Jesus. God is light, energy is light (the whole spectrum not just what we can see), and that energy holds everything together just as Col 1:17 says. Furthermore, those whisps of energy communicate with other whisps of energy and they don't know why or how, but they react to one another. Scientists already agree we do not live in a reality, but a hologram or a matrix system (yes like from the movie), and just like the word of God says, that we are shadows and types of the real things.

So how is it the earth is only 6k years and yet shows to be billions of years old... well, if you build a clock and you assemble the hands to indicate the time, there's a previous time and a future time, but neither are real, only imagined. When the clock starts ticking, then time starts counting even if you can turn the clock backwards or forwards. It only counts from the time (hehehe) it was started. So is the earth 6k years old or 7.4 billion years old? Yes. How? Calculation of time. For the last 300 years, the distance from point A to point B has when light travels from A to B has slowed by 1% per 100 years. So in 300 years, it's slowed 3%. However, it's accumulative. That is, when they applied the slowing in reverse and that in 6000 years, the speed of light was 10,000 times faster than today. Why does that matter? Well, the understanding is that because when they changed how they determined the speed of light from distance/time, to distances/atom oscillations, the slowing down stopped. The light travels the distance the exact number of atom oscillations over and over. Again, why does that matter? If the speed of light is linked to the actions of the atoms, then all the atoms in the universe are slowing down too. Once more, why does that matter? Because it shows that the passage of time is constant, but nothing else is.

An example to understand this to watch this YouTube video:

youtu.be/8BIEBn-Uu6I?t=1m22s

So, the video is 7 min 52 seconds long, but if you watched it all at "our" normal speed, it would have been over in about 2 mins. The proof is at the beginning of the video when the guy ignites a lighter at "our" normal speed and it's over in a second. Then it's shown in slow motion, and the background goes black! But the background was white! Yet, the camera is still catching all the same information, but because the light is slowed, you can't see the light bouncing off the wall to show you it is white. Now, imagine the speed of light is going 10,000 times faster than now. Everything would be different, we would see how much of a difference the "past" is compared to "today" concerning the effects of the speed of light. Finally, to explain this, Adam and Eve lived in regular speed, but we are living in slow motion speed by comparison, and from our perspective is distorted by the slowness of the light. Here's my verse to prove this:

James 4:14 (KJV)

Whereas ye know not what [shall be] on the morrow. For what [is] your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.​

That's my take, and I hope it helps.

 

[Major]

I look at it like this, put a very small sharpy dot on a new balloon and then blow up the balloon. What happens to the dot? It expands and thins out so it turns a bit grey instead of jet black like when you drew it. From God's perspective the dot is our universe. Since science observes that the galaxies are getter further apart - expanding, they reversed it and calculated a beginning. To help simplify and fill in the missing information, they called it the "Big Bang Theory". Either way, I see it as a win for the word of God because until the 1950's(?) scientists thought the universe was eternal without boundaries. Now, they know better. Ever since then they keep proving the word of God true (not that it's needed obviously) but they are learning about God's creation. Why do you think the current theory is that aliens seeded us humans? Because they know God exists, and since evolution is a joke and they know it, they've moved from "billions and trillions of years" to "billion and trillions of light years" claiming someone else did all this. Well, where did "they" come from? See the circular argument? They can't disprove God's existence, so they're now looking for aliens to answer their questions - anything except God. Why is that? Because if God exists, then God is correct, and they're in their sins.

So I don't take their theories to heart, I just think, "would that work in the word of God if remotely accurate". As I see it, the more we learn about creation, it unlocks some more understanding about the word of God. When scientists could see beyond the atom into quarks and muons, they saw more, and more, until they literally - and this is their words - only whisps of energy exists. Guess what that is? It's Jesus. God is light, energy is light (the whole spectrum not just what we can see), and that energy holds everything together just as Col 1:17 says. Furthermore, those whisps of energy communicate with other whisps of energy and they don't know why or how, but they react to one another. Scientists already agree we do not live in a reality, but a hologram or a matrix system (yes like from the movie), and just like the word of God says, that we are shadows and types of the real things.

So how is it the earth is only 6k years and yet shows to be billions of years old... well, if you build a clock and you assemble the hands to indicate the time, there's a previous time and a future time, but neither are real, only imagined. When the clock starts ticking, then time starts counting even if you can turn the clock backwards or forwards. It only counts from the time (hehehe) it was started. So is the earth 6k years old or 7.4 billion years old? Yes. How? Calculation of time. For the last 300 years, the distance from point A to point B has when light travels from A to B has slowed by 1% per 100 years. So in 300 years, it's slowed 3%. However, it's accumulative. That is, when they applied the slowing in reverse and that in 6000 years, the speed of light was 10,000 times faster than today. Why does that matter? Well, the understanding is that because when they changed how they determined the speed of light from distance/time, to distances/atom oscillations, the slowing down stopped. The light travels the distance the exact number of atom oscillations over and over. Again, why does that matter? If the speed of light is linked to the actions of the atoms, then all the atoms in the universe are slowing down too. Once more, why does that matter? Because it shows that the passage of time is constant, but nothing else is.

An example to understand this to watch this YouTube video:

youtu.be/8BIEBn-Uu6I?t=1m22s

So, the video is 7 min 52 seconds long, but if you watched it all at "our" normal speed, it would have been over in about 2 mins. The proof is at the beginning of the video when the guy ignites a lighter at "our" normal speed and it's over in a second. Then it's shown in slow motion, and the background goes black! But the background was white! Yet, the camera is still catching all the same information, but because the light is slowed, you can't see the light bouncing off the wall to show you it is white. Now, imagine the speed of light is going 10,000 times faster than now. Everything would be different, we would see how much of a difference the "past" is compared to "today" concerning the effects of the speed of light. Finally, to explain this, Adam and Eve lived in regular speed, but we are living in slow motion speed by comparison, and from our perspective is distorted by the slowness of the light. Here's my verse to prove this:

James 4:14 (KJV)

Whereas ye know not what [shall be] on the morrow. For what [is] your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.​

That's my take, and I hope it helps.

Very informative but no, it really does not answer the question, IMO.

 

[Abdicate]

Well, I guess we're done.

 

[jay adams]

Well, I guess we're done.

This is a great thread. While it may be true that no Dino bones have been found with Human bones, there have been Dino Footprints found right nearby Human footprints. Evolutionists use all sorts of mental gymnastics to explain away this. Should we expect they wouldnt?
There also have been found Dino bones with Soft tissue still in them on several continents and in the places they were found if they were 65 million years old they should have not had any soft tissue/blood cells left.

Many years ago there was a terrific work made called the Adams Map & History and in there it was described that the Chinese had exaggerated the age of their dynasties. Any archaeological finds that say this culture or that culture is over 6000 years old uses the same Flawed dating methods they use to say rocks, trees, bones, etc are millions of years old. They use a False set of Assumptions that the Rate of Decay and other Rates of Aging processes have always been the same.

Its not rocket science to figure out how a several miles thick Firmament for over 1000 thousands years would completely skew the figures of correct earth ages, but scientists will not accept a Global Flood story.

When Ken Ham debated Bill Nye on the site of the Noahs Ark and brought up the inaccuracies of Tree Ring dating Bill did a Texas 2 step to try and dodge that one. They just cant bring themselves to admit that they could be so very wrong and the Bible be so True.

 

[Wwinnie]

I was wondering where satan was before the earth was formed, since he tempted eve in the garden. I believe in a young earth myself because how could there have been dinasours that died pre-eve's sin, since that is what brought death into the world?

 

[Abdicate]

I was wondering where satan was before the earth was formed, since he tempted eve in the garden. I believe in a young earth myself because how could there have been dinasours that died pre-eve's sin, since that is what brought death into the world?

My two cents are that Satan didn't fall until after Adam was created. He was the most disgruntled creation in that he was the most beautiful and after all the work God put into the universe, God gave it to Adam. I don't think this set well with Satan so he rebelled and made Adam and Eve sin. Since Adam and Eve lived for nearly 1000 years, why not the animals too? When Adam sinned, all the universe changed. After all, man was made a little lower than the angles. My only question is, why/how did the devil get the authority after Adam sinned when he sinned first?

 

[jay adams]

Well lets see what we can do for you. Please know I am know being contradictory and if so I am very sorry.

Again, I am only trying to tell you and others what Old Earth believers accept creation as a creation account.
Young earth believers teach that the earth is Young, only 6000 years old. The problem there of course is the fossils which are much older than 6000 years old.
In fact the city of Jericho is said to be 7500 years old.
That is what the Old Earth theology addresses.

Old Earthers say that Creation would have begun after Gen. 1:2.

Before that .........they believe that there may have been an undeterminable amount of years between verse 1 and verse 2.
That has always been referred to as the "Gap Theory".

OK. That is the end of that. Are you still with me?????????

Now then, another thought apart from that is the belief that there was a pre-Adamic earth which could be billions of years old. That is not an Old Earth teaching but is something altogether different. The teaching came from those who saw the "water" in verse #2 which is present before creation begins. The water seen in Gen. 1:2 according to that teaching would be the water left over from the judgment of that world.

Those are two competing thoughts and neither one may be correct. It is only theories that are out there in the world of Christian teachings.

Now, either one of those positions account for the presence of dinosaur fossils which have been found and dated at being millons of years old.

No matter which one is acceptable, the creation process by God would still be the Genesis account in chapter 1 beginning at verse #3 which is seen as a 6 day event..

I hope that clears it up for you. If not, ask again what the problem is and I will try some more.

The reason we see water before the creation is this is how God chooses to bring in all of his Creation. Mankind's beginning actually began from water, not dust. Dust was just the final step. The earth was born in a Womb of Water just like we all are born in a Womb of Water. Adam came from the dust that had its origins in a Womb of Water.

The reason the Gap Theory and Pre-Adamic race theory has come under attack is because of the Harmony with Exodus 20:11 "for in six days the Lord created the heavens and the earth". If it were 6000 or 6 Billion years it would have stated so. No harm in bringing the other viewpoints up, but they just are not exegetically sound nor do they pass Bible Hermeneutics of cross referencing other passages that relate to creation. Acts 17:26 "26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;"

There was only 1 blood, the blood of Adam that we all come from and only 1 original sin that caused mankind to fall, Adam.

So glad that people do want to discuss these topics. Whether we all agree or not we are spurring one another to dwell on the Word and not Worldly distractions.

 

[Major]

The reason we see water before the creation is this is how God chooses to bring in all of his Creation. Mankind's beginning actually began from water, not dust. Dust was just the final step. The earth was born in a Womb of Water just like we all are born in a Womb of Water. Adam came from the dust that had its origins in a Womb of Water.

The reason the Gap Theory and Pre-Adamic race theory has come under attack is because of the Harmony with Exodus 20:11 "for in six days the Lord created the heavens and the earth". If it were 6000 or 6 Billion years it would have stated so. No harm in bringing the other viewpoints up, but they just are not exegetically sound nor do they pass Bible Hermeneutics of cross referencing other passages that relate to creation. Acts 17:26 "26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;"

There was only 1 blood, the blood of Adam that we all come from and only 1 original sin that caused mankind to fall, Adam.

So glad that people do want to discuss these topics. Whether we all agree or not we are spurring one another to dwell on the Word and not Worldly distractions.

Good thoughts and there is no argument from me on any of them.

May only thought is that the "womb of Water" you spoke of is not actually Biblical. I understand what you are saying and even accept it as a valid thesis however it is not something we can point to in Scripture and prove other than Gen. 1:2.........
"and darkness was upon the face of the deep and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

The Old earth teachers will say that all of that was before Creation and points to an old earth. Then the "Gap" teachers would say that it confirms a large time frame between verses 2 and 3 because actual creative events begin in verse #3.

Both of those ideas would then actually agree in creation then taking 6 days for God to accomplish His work.

 

[Limey]

In the beginning God created the heavens! When! God doesn't say. Science states 13.9 billion years. And the earth, science states 4.9 billion years. Once again God doesn't state a date. What he does say in Job 38 is that all the morning stars and the sons of God including Lucifer shouted for joy. No sign of rebellion here.
Gen 1:2 is a mis-translation, Wyclif was not out to overthrow the doctrines of the Church, and the church taught Gen 1 was God's creation And the earth "was," this word is translated became in Gen 2:7, " and man BECAME a living soul. Tohuw means to lie waste, a desolation. So we translated 1:2 "The earth became desolate and empty". In Isaiah 45:18 God states, "For thus says the the Lord, That created the heavens: God Himself "That formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain (in vain is tohuw) or desolate, He formed it to be inhabited: "I am the Lord." The OED links waste, desolate, without form to vain. These were all synonyms in Wycliff time.
So God didn't make the earth desolate, satan did when he rebelled. Then in 6 literal 24 hour days God did a recreation. NOVA on PBS had a program on "The last extinction," They stated that 12,800 years ago mammoths, sabre toothed tigers and giant sloths roamed America and suddenly they vanished. Is this when satan rebelled and made the earth desolate? Science measures things and extrapolates from small to large We are told plutonium has a half life of 500,000 years, but we have only had plutonium since the late 1940's. So how accurate is this measurement? Another NOVA program was on "The three daughters of Eve," scientists took micachrondrial dna from women all over the world. Their conclusion was that all women living today are descended from three women who lived 150,000 years ago, and they were descended from one woman who lived 50,000 years prior. They now state all men living today are descended from one man. Science proves the Bible, just the time line is wrong. Recently a geologist in S. America was studying rocks from deep below the earth, his conclusion was there is more water locked up in the earth crust in the form of hydrates, than all the oceans of the world. Plenty of water for Noah's flood.
So I believe in God creating the heavens aka "The Big Bang." I believe 4.9 billion years ago Lucifer, the anointed cherub, shouted for joy with all heaven. I believe Satan rebelled 6000 years ago, and God recreated the earth and heavens.

 

[Fish Catcher Jim]

This Thread Has Run It's Course.
Nothing more can be added that won't turn into debates.
Thank you every one for your replies.
God Bless