Progressing from Milk to Meat

Dec 19, 2014
5,696
2,431
113
New Zealand
www.literatelibrarian.com
It seems to me that the root of the differences come down to those who ridgeidly and dogmatically hold to a 24 hour, 7 day, 365 day year of creation no matter what.

Again, it comes down to what we understand about Creation and whether it is a 6 day event or is there some kind of explanation where we are just not given the whole story in Genesis. Is it Old earth or Young earth? We all like a mystery and when we do not have the details our minds go to work and our brains fill in the gaps.

Through the use of radiometric dating, scientists have been able to estimate the age of the earth to be within a percent or two of 4.54 billion years. A literal interpretation Genesis, however, tells us something very different.

Just the fact that man has dug up the skeletons of animals who science says lived millions of years ago should cause our light to go on.

The Bible provides details about many of the descendants of Adam (the first man), including some information about the ages at which these descendants had children and died. But it is also true that the genealogies of man have many, many gaps in them. A number of biblical scholars have used this information (combined sometimes with information elsewhere in the Bible) to construct accounts of how old the earth must be, with estimates ranging from about 6,000 to 10,000 years, in dramatic contradiction with the scientific estimate.

Science is convinced that all dinosaur bones must be at least 65 million years old. Those who take Genesis as real history would predict that no dinosaur bone is more than a few thousand years old.

So the challenge then is how do we reconcile that obvious difference when we are holding a dinosaur bone in our hand?

Geoglocal time is working to a different timescale. They are not thinking of 24 hour days, 7 day weeks. They actually measure percentages and make estimates on a different measurment. Also, i think some scientists just bandy about years thinking that years means 365 days, but a year is basically when the earth. Makes a full orbit around the sun and it could have been faster or slower depending on how fast or slow God wanted to turn the earth!
 
Dec 19, 2014
5,696
2,431
113
New Zealand
www.literatelibrarian.com
The earth was probably spinning much slower in the early days and is now spinning faster. Is my rough theory!

But as the Bible says, a thousand years to us, is one year to God. So thats something for the mathemeticians to figure out to balance the equation.
 
Feb 10, 2015
844
997
93
Maryland
It seems to me that the root of the differences come down to those who ridgeidly and dogmatically hold to a 24 hour, 7 day, 365 day year of creation no matter what.

Again, it comes down to what we understand about Creation and whether it is a 6 day event or is there some kind of explanation where we are just not given the whole story in Genesis. Is it Old earth or Young earth? We all like a mystery and when we do not have the details our minds go to work and our brains fill in the gaps.

Through the use of radiometric dating, scientists have been able to estimate the age of the earth to be within a percent or two of 4.54 billion years. A literal interpretation Genesis, however, tells us something very different.

Just the fact that man has dug up the skeletons of animals who science says lived millions of years ago should cause our light to go on.

The Bible provides details about many of the descendants of Adam (the first man), including some information about the ages at which these descendants had children and died. But it is also true that the genealogies of man have many, many gaps in them. A number of biblical scholars have used this information (combined sometimes with information elsewhere in the Bible) to construct accounts of how old the earth must be, with estimates ranging from about 6,000 to 10,000 years, in dramatic contradiction with the scientific estimate.

Science is convinced that all dinosaur bones must be at least 65 million years old. Those who take Genesis as real history would predict that no dinosaur bone is more than a few thousand years old.

So the challenge then is how do we reconcile that obvious difference when we are holding a dinosaur bone in our hand?
It’s more than the consideration of a single fossilized bone separate from other evidences. The thing is, most sciences that look at the natural world only make sense if the universe is old.

Astronomy, Geology, Biology all point to an ancient world.

I find it ironic that Evolution (a sub subject of Biology with some Geology and a tiny bit of nuclear science mixed in) has become the point of battle.

When Darwin came out with Origin, the rest of the physical sciences was trying to explain an eternal universe. While astronomers had noticed the expansion of the universe and had come to consensus as to its meaning, as late as the latter 1960s when I went to high school, astronomy textbooks, which had information from the early 1950s were still reporting a debate between the big band and a steady state universe. In fact, even a few decades after Darwin Einstein included the gravitational constant in his equations for the expressed purpose of providing a way of adjusting the equation to produce an eternal universe.

Thus Evolution seems to be the first of the sciences to even contemplate a beginning. In fact, some Biblical expounders of the day held evolution as the scientific vindication of scripture since it presupposes a beginning.

On the scriptural side, it is much less of a stretch to note that in Hebrew (and in most languages, including English) the word used for day (YOM in the case of Hebrew) is used to refer to an indefinite period of time delimited by circumstances, as in “back in my day”, or “In Lincoln’s day”, or even “the Day of the Lord”. In none of these cases is it assumed to necessarily be related to a 24 hour period. Once that is taken into account, we can see that the circumstances of each day in Genesis is materially different from the prior and successive day and is appropriate to the work on that day.
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
It’s more than the consideration of a single fossilized bone separate from other evidences. The thing is, most sciences that look at the natural world only make sense if the universe is old.

Astronomy, Geology, Biology all point to an ancient world.

I find it ironic that Evolution (a sub subject of Biology with some Geology and a tiny bit of nuclear science mixed in) has become the point of battle.

When Darwin came out with Origin, the rest of the physical sciences was trying to explain an eternal universe. While astronomers had noticed the expansion of the universe and had come to consensus as to its meaning, as late as the latter 1960s when I went to high school, astronomy textbooks, which had information from the early 1950s were still reporting a debate between the big band and a steady state universe. In fact, even a few decades after Darwin Einstein included the gravitational constant in his equations for the expressed purpose of providing a way of adjusting the equation to produce an eternal universe.

Thus Evolution seems to be the first of the sciences to even contemplate a beginning. In fact, some Biblical expounders of the day held evolution as the scientific vindication of scripture since it presupposes a beginning.

On the scriptural side, it is much less of a stretch to note that in Hebrew (and in most languages, including English) the word used for day (YOM in the case of Hebrew) is used to refer to an indefinite period of time delimited by circumstances, as in “back in my day”, or “In Lincoln’s day”, or even “the Day of the Lord”. In none of these cases is it assumed to necessarily be related to a 24 hour period. Once that is taken into account, we can see that the circumstances of each day in Genesis is materially different from the prior and successive day and is appropriate to the work on that day.
It seems that we are on the same page of understanding.
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
Geoglocal time is working to a different timescale. They are not thinking of 24 hour days, 7 day weeks. They actually measure percentages and make estimates on a different measurment. Also, i think some scientists just bandy about years thinking that years means 365 days, but a year is basically when the earth. Makes a full orbit around the sun and it could have been faster or slower depending on how fast or slow God wanted to turn the earth!
Actually, I think that if you do a little work on your opinion, I think the number of days in a year was higher in the past than today, because the Earth is spinning down due to tidal friction with the Moon, so that the days become longer now.
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
The earth was probably spinning much slower in the early days and is now spinning faster. Is my rough theory!

But as the Bible says, a thousand years to us, is one year to God. So thats something for the mathemeticians to figure out to balance the equation.
If I had a dollar for each time I heard someone use this phrase to add thousands of years to the biblical, six-day Creation I could have retired a long time ago.

First, the Bible does not say, “With God one day is a thousand years and a thousand years is one day.” The apostle Peter actually wrote in 2 Peter 3:8.....
“Beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is AS a thousand years, and a thousand years AS one day” .

Peter used a figure of speech known as a simile to compare a day to a thousand years. It is not that one day is precisely equivalent to 1,000 years or vice versa. Rather, within the specific context of 2 Peter 3, one could say that they share a likeness.

Bible understanding is Always determined by the CONTEXT.
T
he context of 2 Peter 3? In this passage, Peter reminded Christians that “scoffers” would arise in the last days saying, “Where is the promise of His [Jesus’] coming?” (vss. 3-4). Peter declared: “[T]he heavens and the earth...are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (vs. 7). Regardless of what the scoffers alleged about the Second Coming, Peter wanted the church to know that “the Lord is not slack concerning His promise [of a return], as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (vs. 9).

Sandwiched between these thoughts is the fact that the passing of time does not affect God’s promises, specifically the promise of His return. If Jesus promised to return 1,000 or 2,000 years ago, it is as good as if He made the promise yesterday. Indeed, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”

With men, the passing of long periods of time generally affects their keeping of promises, but not with God. Time has no bearing on whether He will do what He said He would do: “a thousand years are like a day”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thenami and rtm3039

rtm3039

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
Feb 5, 2019
961
685
93
Miami, FL
Um..God bang? Doesnt make sense. Sorry.
No Lanolin, you can't take it literally. The Big Bang (the event that created everything). God (the event that created everything).

Do you know the story of the elephant and the two blind guys? The blind guys and in between an elephant. The guy in the back describes the elephant as a really big animal with a long and thin tail. The guy in the front describes the elephant as a big animal with a long and thick tail. Two different interpretations of the same thing.

Here is how I see it: Believing in God and believing in science both take a certain amount of faith. The foundation of the Big Bang is: "The universe began as a very hot, small, and dense superforce (the mix of the four fundamental forces (gravitation, electromagnetism, the weak interaction, and the strong interaction)), with no stars, atoms, form, or structure (called a "singularity")." So, science claims that this is how it all started, but can't explain the origins of this "superforce." In other words, there really was not "nothing" to start with, so who created the "something" (gravitation, electromagnetism, the weak interaction, and the strong interaction).

If you believe in science and you are right, you just die and that's the end of it. If you are wrong, you die and spend eternity wishing you had made a better choice. If you believe in God and you are right, death just becomes the end of one experience and the beginning of an eternal experience that is better than anything any of us can imagine. If you are wrong, then you just die and that's the end of it.

So, given the choice, and we have all been given the choice, I'm going with the God option. I still believe in science, because I honestly think that science is a technical explanation of what God did/does.

rtm3039
 
  • Like
Reactions: thenami and Major

rtm3039

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
Feb 5, 2019
961
685
93
Miami, FL
If I had a dollar for each time I heard someone use this phrase to add thousands of years to the biblical, six-day Creation I could have retired a long time ago.

First, the Bible does not say, “With God one day is a thousand years and a thousand years is one day.” The apostle Peter actually wrote in 2 Peter 3:8.....
“Beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is AS a thousand years, and a thousand years AS one day” .

Peter used a figure of speech known as a simile to compare a day to a thousand years. It is not that one day is precisely equivalent to 1,000 years or vice versa. Rather, within the specific context of 2 Peter 3, one could say that they share a likeness.

Bible understanding is Always determined by the CONTEXT.
T
he context of 2 Peter 3? In this passage, Peter reminded Christians that “scoffers” would arise in the last days saying, “Where is the promise of His [Jesus’] coming?” (vss. 3-4). Peter declared: “[T]he heavens and the earth...are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (vs. 7). Regardless of what the scoffers alleged about the Second Coming, Peter wanted the church to know that “the Lord is not slack concerning His promise [of a return], as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (vs. 9).

Sandwiched between these thoughts is the fact that the passing of time does not affect God’s promises, specifically the promise of His return. If Jesus promised to return 1,000 or 2,000 years ago, it is as good as if He made the promise yesterday. Indeed, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”

With men, the passing of long periods of time generally affects their keeping of promises, but not with God. Time has no bearing on whether He will do what He said He would do: “a thousand years are like a day”.
Thanks. I like the context you highlighted.
rtm3039
 
  • Like
Reactions: Major
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
No Lanolin, you can't take it literally. The Big Bang (the event that created everything). God (the event that created everything).

Do you know the story of the elephant and the two blind guys? The blind guys and in between an elephant. The guy in the back describes the elephant as a really big animal with a long and thin tail. The guy in the front describes the elephant as a big animal with a long and thick tail. Two different interpretations of the same thing.

Here is how I see it: Believing in God and believing in science both take a certain amount of faith. The foundation of the Big Bang is: "The universe began as a very hot, small, and dense superforce (the mix of the four fundamental forces (gravitation, electromagnetism, the weak interaction, and the strong interaction)), with no stars, atoms, form, or structure (called a "singularity")." So, science claims that this is how it all started, but can't explain the origins of this "superforce." In other words, there really was not "nothing" to start with, so who created the "something" (gravitation, electromagnetism, the weak interaction, and the strong interaction).

If you believe in science and you are right, you just die and that's the end of it. If you are wrong, you die and spend eternity wishing you had made a better choice. If you believe in God and you are right, death just becomes the end of one experience and the beginning of an eternal experience that is better than anything any of us can imagine. If you are wrong, then you just die and that's the end of it.

So, given the choice, and we have all been given the choice, I'm going with the God option. I still believe in science, because I honestly think that science is a technical explanation of what God did/does.

rtm3039
Well....it is like this. There are only two ways to explain why we are here.

1). Either the Universe has always existed, or
2). it had a beginning.

Very strong evidence points to the latter.

So then, what was the beginning?
1). Big bang which lead to evolution.
2). God's way by which He created everything.

The problem as I see it is how does the Christian community explain the animal bones from millions of years ago that have been fossilized when the Bible at best places man on the earth 10,000 years ago.

People who question the Creation account in the Bible ask...…..."Why would God leave out a description of the dinosaurs?"
That is a bad question to begin with. A more appropriate question should be "What would God want to relate to man about His description of the creation?"

God was not interested in giving Moses a scientific treatise on the creation of the world. The Bible indicates that God's communication to Moses was centered on the relationship between God and man and the rules by which God wanted man to live. Therefore, the creation account mirrors the content of the rest of the Bible, which centers on mankind and his relationship to God.
 
Feb 10, 2015
844
997
93
Maryland
"What would God want to relate to man about His description of the creation?"
Yes, the very fact that one is interested in the question means that once one has become convinced for himself that evolution has occurred (or the opposite view for that matter) one should come to an understanding what that teaches us about God.

I have been convinced about evolution for much of my adult life, and as a Christian, I have been more interested in what I can learn about God than I am in endless debates about who is right as important as that question may be.

With some notable exceptions, there has been little written from this perspective, and I feel very uneasy relying on my own thoughts, at least until I have discussed it with other believers.

Isaiah 5:21 (NASB)
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
And clever in their own sight!
Proverbs 16:2 (NASB)
All the ways of a man are clean in his own sight,
But the Lord weighs the motives.
I have found some books that explore the message God may have for us in evolution, including

Thank God for Evolution by Michael Dowd

and

God after Darwin by John Haught

I find these interesting, there is some over-reach and some logical floundering, but unlike salvation or prayer, there has not been many lifetimes of many believers working out the meaning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Major
Sep 7, 2019
163
141
43
55
North Carolina
My my how this conversation has progressed in my having to work, and take care of four pets while my daughter and son in law are on vacation.

There is reference to the "heavens" being created by God, which includes the galaxies. If there was a "big bang" of any kind, it was certainly God that created it. If we "evolved" it was because God created us to evolve. God is all, created all, from beginning to the ending (alpha and omega). When I post about this on other forums some begin to question science, and believe a creator/supreme being is a possibility. It opens to door to post about the salvation of Christ. Faith comes by hearing...
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
My my how this conversation has progressed in my having to work, and take care of four pets while my daughter and son in law are on vacation.

There is reference to the "heavens" being created by God, which includes the galaxies. If there was a "big bang" of any kind, it was certainly God that created it. If we "evolved" it was because God created us to evolve. God is all, created all, from beginning to the ending (alpha and omega). When I post about this on other forums some begin to question science, and believe a creator/supreme being is a possibility. It opens to door to post about the salvation of Christ. Faith comes by hearing...
Question. Just to keep us all "thinking"...…..what do you think about the idea that a great catastrophe happened lets say 65 million years ago.

Scientists tell us now that a giant meteor or asteroid hit the earth and killed off all life.

Just a question...….Could it be possible that the catastrophe was instead of a Meteor it was a falling star named Satan?????

The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence, written in stone, that testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was populated long before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. But does that record provide evidence of the sudden end of the old world by a universal destructive event before the seven days and before Noah's flood?

"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
This certainly would appear to be the case. Throughout the geologic record there is evidence of a mass extinction and geologic catastrophes.
Source: https://kjvbible.org/death of the ancient world.html

Ezejiel 28:17 is a verse to take notice of when God removed Satan from heaven.................
"So I threw you to the earth…" !

In verse 17 God says about Lucifer, "So I threw you to the earth."

In the process of throwing Lucifer to earth, do you think it is possible that our planet as well as the WHOLE UNIVERSE was affected with tremendous force.

Remember, I am only asking a question when trying to resove the question of the Word of God to the geologic and paleontological evidence of science.
We look around us at imperial evidence in an attempt to draw a logical conclusion on this matter of origins. If you have seen and come to your own conclusion, based on the facts, that evolutionary theory is a VERY, VERY flawed theory--weak at best--then what else is there?

The Bible or somply-------I do not know!!!!

In fact......Life through evolution would be one of the greatest miracles to ever have taken place, if it were to be true.

Another proven fact is The huge chalk cliffs, the White Cliffs of Dover in England. It has been shown that they are dead diatoms, nannoplankton,
(a single-celled alga which has a cell wall of silica) from the K/T Barrier, dated 65 million years ago! Revelation 12:7-9 is not only a prophecy for the future, but a reflection of that Star ( SATAN???) Wars that occurred in the distant past of 65 million years ago.
 

rtm3039

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
Feb 5, 2019
961
685
93
Miami, FL
Question. Just to keep us all "thinking"...…..what do you think about the idea that a great catastrophe happened lets say 65 million years ago.

Scientists tell us now that a giant meteor or asteroid hit the earth and killed off all life.

Just a question...….Could it be possible that the catastrophe was instead of a Meteor it was a falling star named Satan?????

The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence, written in stone, that testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was populated long before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. But does that record provide evidence of the sudden end of the old world by a universal destructive event before the seven days and before Noah's flood?



This certainly would appear to be the case. Throughout the geologic record there is evidence of a mass extinction and geologic catastrophes.
Source: https://kjvbible.org/death of the ancient world.html

Ezejiel 28:17 is a verse to take notice of when God removed Satan from heaven.................
"So I threw you to the earth…" !

In verse 17 God says about Lucifer, "So I threw you to the earth."

In the process of throwing Lucifer to earth, do you think it is possible that our planet as well as the WHOLE UNIVERSE was affected with tremendous force.

Remember, I am only asking a question when trying to resove the question of the Word of God to the geologic and paleontological evidence of science.
We look around us at imperial evidence in an attempt to draw a logical conclusion on this matter of origins. If you have seen and come to your own conclusion, based on the facts, that evolutionary theory is a VERY, VERY flawed theory--weak at best--then what else is there?

The Bible or somply-------I do not know!!!!

In fact......Life through evolution would be one of the greatest miracles to ever have taken place, if it were to be true.

Another proven fact is The huge chalk cliffs, the White Cliffs of Dover in England. It has been shown that they are dead diatoms, nannoplankton,
(a single-celled alga which has a cell wall of silica) from the K/T Barrier, dated 65 million years ago! Revelation 12:7-9 is not only a prophecy for the future, but a reflection of that Star ( SATAN???) Wars that occurred in the distant past of 65 million years ago.
This conversation is really interesting and I am thankful that we can discuss this subject without conflict. I'll say this much for the moment: (1) I have no issues with evolution, the "Big Bang," or the extinction theory. (2) God is awesome and I have no problems believing that He designed all living things to evolve to changing environments. (3) I also have no problem believing that our existence (as well as all other things) is much older than some people thing. (4) I have no problems believing that God has given us all the knowledge we need, but not all the knowledge there is.

I have no issues believing that a man of God and a man of Science can describe the same thing, but use totally different language in going so.
 
Sep 7, 2019
163
141
43
55
North Carolina
I do not believe satan was in a physical form, but spiritual because he is still here. Therefore throwing him down to earth would show no physical sign. We cant see Christ, but we can feel him through the holy spirit given to us as a free gift through faith.

Combining spiritual evidence biblically with empirical evidence physically would lead my mind, and spirit to this conclusion. The earth's formation took time; it would explain why things are older than others. The great flood also had to have a great geological impact on the earth. Now mix the two, and we get what science calls geology. Maybe the dinosaurs roamed before the flood, and God chose not to put them in an ark. However any information is a crude crayon drawing, in comparison to what we do not understand about our galaxy. Theories are theories until proven. Now heres the kicker... It takes the same human faith to believe in a theory as it does to believe in God, for neither provide exact empirical evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Major and rtm3039
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
I do not believe satan was in a physical form, but spiritual because he is still here. Therefore throwing him down to earth would show no physical sign. We cant see Christ, but we can feel him through the holy spirit given to us as a free gift through faith.

Combining spiritual evidence biblically with empirical evidence physically would lead my mind, and spirit to this conclusion. The earth's formation took time; it would explain why things are older than others. The great flood also had to have a great geological impact on the earth. Now mix the two, and we get what science calls geology. Maybe the dinosaurs roamed before the flood, and God chose not to put them in an ark. However any information is a crude crayon drawing, in comparison to what we do not understand about our galaxy. Theories are theories until proven. Now heres the kicker... It takes the same human faith to believe in a theory as it does to believe in God, for neither provide exact empirical evidence.
I hear you, however, most scholars hold that it was Satan in the Garden of Eden who was speaking through the snake, not the snake itself speaking on its own. Thus, the Genesis 3 account it is not suggesting that snakes were of an intellect that would have enabled them to speak coherently.

Rev. 12:9......…...
"So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."----------PAST!

Rev. 20:2......…......
"He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years."--------Yet FUTURE!

Those Scriptures seem to indicate that Satan is a REAL Entity.

Also, From other passages we find an important principle. Satan and demons can enter into people and animals and influence them. For example, Judas was entered by Satan in Luke 22:3; Peter was influenced by Satan1 (Matthew 16:23); and the swine were entered by Legion, which consisted of many demons (Mark 5, Matthew 8).

The question always comes back to this.
If the Creation account in Geneis is true, then how do we explain the bones of animals who are hundreds of millions of years old??????

Is the way of carbon dating rocks and bones an illegitimate process????

Is the geological arena of people involved in a fraud to make the animal bones appear older than 10,000 years old????

Did Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel and Seth and their children live with dinosaurs and God just forget to include that information in the Bible for us?????

Did God leave them off of the Ark and again just did not want us to know?

Was there a pre-Adamic creation that was destroyed when Satan fell millions of years ago.

The Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation takes a somewhat different approach to the pre-Adamic race theory. According to the Gap Theory, an unspecified amount of time passed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, during which God created a pre-Adamic race of men who lived upon the earth until God destroyed them in judgment. Other extinct creatures, like the dinosaurs, are said to have also lived during this time. Afterwards, the theory goes, God remodeled the earth in six days. He created Adam on the sixth day, and the rest is history. Some say that Satan’s fall occurred at some point during the ambiguous gap.
 

rtm3039

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
Feb 5, 2019
961
685
93
Miami, FL
I hear you, however, most scholars hold that it was Satan in the Garden of Eden who was speaking through the snake, not the snake itself speaking on its own. Thus, the Genesis 3 account it is not suggesting that snakes were of an intellect that would have enabled them to speak coherently.

Rev. 12:9......…...
"So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."----------PAST!

Rev. 20:2......…......
"He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years."--------Yet FUTURE!

Those Scriptures seem to indicate that Satan is a REAL Entity.

Also, From other passages we find an important principle. Satan and demons can enter into people and animals and influence them. For example, Judas was entered by Satan in Luke 22:3; Peter was influenced by Satan1 (Matthew 16:23); and the swine were entered by Legion, which consisted of many demons (Mark 5, Matthew 8).

The question always comes back to this.
If the Creation account in Geneis is true, then how do we explain the bones of animals who are hundreds of millions of years old??????

Is the way of carbon dating rocks and bones an illegitimate process????

Is the geological arena of people involved in a fraud to make the animal bones appear older than 10,000 years old????

Did Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel and Seth and their children live with dinosaurs and God just forget to include that information in the Bible for us?????

Did God leave them off of the Ark and again just did not want us to know?

Was there a pre-Adamic creation that was destroyed when Satan fell millions of years ago.

The Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation takes a somewhat different approach to the pre-Adamic race theory. According to the Gap Theory, an unspecified amount of time passed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, during which God created a pre-Adamic race of men who lived upon the earth until God destroyed them in judgment. Other extinct creatures, like the dinosaurs, are said to have also lived during this time. Afterwards, the theory goes, God remodeled the earth in six days. He created Adam on the sixth day, and the rest is history. Some say that Satan’s fall occurred at some point during the ambiguous gap.
Major, don't you find it interesting that, not having read the link you posted, the content of our last conversation was based identically on the point highlighted by La Peyrère?

rtm3039
 
Sep 7, 2019
163
141
43
55
North Carolina
Major why do you wish for me to expound further when the summary of my responses have already explained my beliefs? I do not discount the biblical accounts in the garden of Eden. Therefore in the spirit form satan is able to influence this physical world for he is here, and not of heaven. Our Father and his Son are of heaven, and have granted us with the gift of eternal life. Maybe it took billions of years to create the earth, and not every creature on earth was referenced to in the bible.

Your line of questioning might cause others to question their faith, that are still drinking milk and not eating meat. As I Christian woman I humbly ask for forgiveness of my Father in heaven for openly correcting a man for it is not my place to do so.

Peace out peeps~ Catch y'all in a different thread. Much blessings and love to all.
 

rtm3039

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
Feb 5, 2019
961
685
93
Miami, FL
Major why do you wish for me to expound further when the summary of my responses have already explained my beliefs? I do not discount the biblical accounts in the garden of Eden. Therefore in the spirit form satan is able to influence this physical world for he is here, and not of heaven. Our Father and his Son are of heaven, and have granted us with the gift of eternal life. Maybe it took billions of years to create the earth, and not every creature on earth was referenced to in the bible.

Your line of questioning might cause others to question their faith, that are still drinking milk and not eating meat. As I Christian woman I humbly ask for forgiveness of my Father in heaven for openly correcting a man for it is not my place to do so.

Peace out peeps~ Catch y'all in a different thread. Much blessings and love to all.
thenami, I want to thank you for the comments you have made. I thought each was thought provoking, yet consistent with our faith on our Lord. The questions here will probable not be answered, until we have the opportunity of asking our Creator and then, I suspect, the answer will be simple and straight forward. I particularly loved your comment "Now here's the kicker... It takes the same human faith to believe in a theory as it does to believe in God, for neither provide exact empirical evidence." This is very true.

Thank you,

rtm3039
 
  • Like
Reactions: thenami
Sep 3, 2009
12,058
4,644
113
Florida
Major why do you wish for me to expound further when the summary of my responses have already explained my beliefs? I do not discount the biblical accounts in the garden of Eden. Therefore in the spirit form satan is able to influence this physical world for he is here, and not of heaven. Our Father and his Son are of heaven, and have granted us with the gift of eternal life. Maybe it took billions of years to create the earth, and not every creature on earth was referenced to in the bible.

Your line of questioning might cause others to question their faith, that are still drinking milk and not eating meat. As I Christian woman I humbly ask for forgiveness of my Father in heaven for openly correcting a man for it is not my place to do so.

Peace out peeps~ Catch y'all in a different thread. Much blessings and love to all.
My sincere apologies sister. I thought we were just having a conversation on MILK or MEAT and I had no desire to cause you to think or do anything.

I never approach anyone who is not rooted in the Word of God and the people in this thread appeared to be well grounded.

I am sorry that you feel the way you do and I will not proceed with any comments to you and please accept my apology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rtm3039