The Alien Question part 1

[Stc95]

Originally Posted by Brydon

Hey, just to stir the pot on the age of the earth thing... If we believe in real eternal life, there's no reason to think that Adam and Eve COULDN'T have been kicking around Eden for millions and millions of years before the fall. The Bible doesn't say that it was a next day thing... We are just so far from comprehending eternal life, that we automatically assume short time spans

But adam was only about 900 years old. Not millions.

[Zeena]

Originally Posted by Stc95

But adam was only about 900 years old. Not millions.

Our Heavenly Father never said when time actually began, did He?

[ewoksrule]

Umm actually He did..(well Human time I mean) Here we see that Adam was born on the 6th day.

Genesis 1
27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.... 31And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Here we see how old Adam lived.

Genesis 5
1This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. 2Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. 3When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. 4 The days of Adam after he fathered Seth were 800 years; and he had other sons and daughters. 5Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died.

We have mornings and evenings, we have it clearly saying when he was born and died. I just don't see why we need to make this any less simple.

[Stc95]

Originally Posted by Zeena

Our Heavenly Father never said when time actually began, did He?

Not in so many words but if we use that logic, Time has never started since God has never recorded when time starts. Eternal life is without a doubt. God is eternal and that's plain and simple. He was here long before the Earth was made, and He'll be here long after. However, just because there is eternal life, doesn't mean that Adam and Eve, or the Earth, has been in creation for millions of years. And I'm under the impression that Adam invented this whole Time thing. He is, after all, the smartest being to walk the planet (save Jesus of course) as he was given life straight from the breath of God. He HAD to be smart. He had to name all the animals God just made, as well as plants. That dude HAD to have been BRILLIANT. Although I think he got tired and cut corners when it came to oranges. I think that's lame

but anyways, Time is a man-made thing we use so we can keep an order in our linear minds. God is not bound by anything, much less a fictional thing. However, God was very very wise when He had whoever it was that wrote Genesis use it in days. And while there is nothing saying that those days ARE NOT metaphorical and really meant eons of time. (it very well could be, I won't know unless God tells me or I ask Jesus face to face) However, I find that there is a lot of other physical evidence to claim the Earth is much younger than whatever number they're claiming now.

[Zeena]

Originally Posted by ewoksrule

Umm actually He did..(well Human time I mean) Here we see that Adam was born on the 6th day.

That is a very literal interpretation..

But the reality of the matter is that it might not be so cut and dry..

Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Originally Posted by ewoksrule

Here we see how old Adam lived.

We have mornings and evenings, we have it clearly saying when he was born and died. I just don't see why we need to make this any less simple.

Becuase some of us still ask questions-lol

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.


As far as the morning and evening statement, that too may have been extended period of relative time, yes?

[ewoksrule]

Originally Posted by Zeena

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

As far as the morning and evening statement, that too may have been extended period of relative time, yes?

A red flag goes off to me when you post something like this. I feel like to just pull out one verse and apply it to another verse like that is not really a good way to read/apply God's Word. I think, one can make the Bible say absolutely anything you want that way.

If you look at the whole chapter of Peter, It is clear that Peter is NOT writing about creation but the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ. Peter is telling us the obvious, the Lord is coming back at ANY time. That time means nothing to the Lord, He will come back, maybe even before you reach the end of this sentence!!

So we know Peter is not talking about creation...it is not mentioned anywhere in the chapter!

We could make endless threads with horrible results if we treat the Bible this way. I understand that you are trying to have fun and entertain wild and mysterious theories about life. I am just not sure its the best practice, especially on public Christian forums like this I am not saying asking questions is wrong but only that we should be careful in how we approach study of the Scriptures and pulling verses out of context is a very serious issue.

[Stc95]

Originally Posted by Zeena

Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

I am very very sketchy on this, but I believe verse 22 needs to be joined with verse 23 and a definition of "lest"

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

Originally Posted by http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lest

lest: for fear that; so that (one) should not
 

Now if I understand these verses, Adam and Eve just ate from the tree of knowledge. So they have become like God and Wisdom: (the "us" God is referring too [I heard my parents talking about that, idk for sure]) knowledgeable. And while it is good to be smart ("and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear" 1 Peter 3:15) we were meant to live off faith and we shouldn't have had to wonder if there is a God and worry about medicine, science, and all that other stuff we are so "knowledgeable" about because in the Garden God would have walked with us DAILY. There would have been to need to be smart, cause God is right there!

So now Adam and Eve became smart and realized they were naked So God says to himself "OH NO! They messed up, they are smart now, I better kick them out of the Garden before they find the tree of Life and "live for ever." Think of our world today and how messed up it is because we are "smart", now think of it if we were "smart" AND immortal? O_O And if there is a tree of knowledge, there stands to reason that there are other trees with supernatural powers.

Obviously God wants us to live forever.. with Him. That's why Jesus died and rose again. He wants us to be forever, just not on Earth. And personally, I don't want to live forever here, this place sucks frankly. So just verse 22 on its own contradicts the whole purpose of Jesus. Because if we change "lest" in the definition form verse 22 would read "...to know good and evil: and now, for fear that he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:" that would mean God DOESN'T want us to live forever and He is afraid of it. Yet when combined with 23, it gives context to WHERE God doesn't want us to live forever and a reason to why God exiled Adam and Eve.

Idk how much I circled the point and repeated myself, but hopefully you get my point

I also agree with Ewok that 2 Peter refers to a God not bound by time, and that Jesus will return and take us to Heaven where "one day is... as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day"

However, you are correct that it isn't dry. Many significant parts of the Bible are not literal (Psalms) and that brings up the question if other books of the Bible are metaphorical (Genesis). Yet even with that question, I don't see why God couldn't make the Earth in 6 literal 24 hour days, and there is a lot of physical evidence to support that, that scientists seem to refuse. Also I haven't found too much physical evidence supporting a million year old earth. So right now I am fully convinced and I feel I have the Spirit's permission on this to say what I say. I think similar to Paul's confidence in Romans 9:1 "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost".

But I think it's fun to debate about it I'm actually learning a lot. This morning I had a conflict with that "lest" thing and I was like "God? I don't get this! Why don't you want good things for us?" But as it neared the time for me to head off to school God told me to wait and it'll come to me. I thought if I mediated throughout the day I'll get it, but now I realize that this thread and topic lead me to an understanding about 16 hours later. Thanks for being such a great people guys. This Alliance has helped my spiritual life more than you will ever know, and I hope that I'm actually making sense and helping others instead of writing huge blobs of text that only make people more and more confused.. cause that would be bad

[Zeena]

Originally Posted by ewoksrule

A red flag goes off to me when you post something like this. I feel like to just pull out one verse and apply it to another verse like that is not really a good way to read/apply God's Word. I think, one can make the Bible say absolutely anything you want that way.

If you look at the whole chapter of Peter, It is clear that Peter is NOT writing about creation but the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ. Peter is telling us the obvious, the Lord is coming back at ANY time. That time means nothing to the Lord, He will come back, maybe even before you reach the end of this sentence!!

So we know Peter is not talking about creation...it is not mentioned anywhere in the chapter!

We could make endless threads with horrible results if we treat the Bible this way. I understand that you are trying to have fun and entertain wild and mysterious theories about life. I am just not sure its the best practice, especially on public Christian forums like this I am not saying asking questions is wrong but only that we should be careful in how we approach study of the Scriptures and pulling verses out of context is a very serious issue.

You say it's a horrible result, but what I see as a horrible result resulting from YEC is that a lot of scientific facts [and thus the people behind the science of discovering these facts] are left out of the loop!

I have contemplated these thoughts with God and I have not frivilously expounded on a view that is generally accepted to be mistreating of the Scripture.

I also noticed that you editied the post to exclude the Scripture, which [Scripture] can easily be construde as progressive Creationism, imo.

This is not a cause for attacking the faith of a fellow believer, nor is it a reason to discontinue fellowship, but rather, we are to sharpen one another as iron sharpens iron

Biblical Evidence for Long Creation Days
by Rich Deem

Introduction The age of the earth and the universe is no longer disputed among most scientists. Science tells us the earth is ~4.5 x 109 years old. The universe is ~14 x 109 years old. There have been several Christian scientists who have attempted to propose theories and find "scientific" evidence that the earth is only 6,000 years old. All "evidence" for a recent creation of the earth is flawed in some way (for a discussion of this topic, see Dr. Hugh Ross' book, A Matter of Days).

Hebrew Words Literal translations of the Hebrew word, yom, like our English word "day," can refer to a 24 hour day, sunrise to sunset (12 hours), or a long, unspecified period of time (as in "the day of the dinosaurs"). The Hebrew word ereb, translated evening also means "sunset," "night" or "ending of the day." The Hebrew word boqer, translated morning, also means "sunrise," "coming of light," "beginning of the day," or "dawning," with possible metaphoric usage (1). Our English expression: "The dawning of an age" serves to illustrate this point. This expression in Hebrew could use the word, boqer, for dawning, which, in Genesis 1, is often translated morning.

Do all the instances of "morning" and evening" refer to a literal period of time? Here is an example from Moses:

In the morning it [grass] flourishes, and sprouts anew; Toward evening it fades, and withers away. (Psalm 90:6)

This verse refers to the life cycle of grass (compared to the short life span of humans). Obviously, the grass does not grow up in one morning and die by the same evening. The period of time refers to its birth (morning) and its death (evening) at least several weeks (if not months) later.

The first thing one notices when looking at Genesis 1 is the unusual construction surrounding the words morning and evening together with day. This combination is very rare, occurring only ten times in the Old Testament, six of which, of course, are in the Genesis creation account. The remaining four verses (NASB) are listed below:

1."This is the offering which Aaron and his sons are to present to the LORD on the day when he is anointed; the tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a regular grain offering, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening." (Leviticus 6:20)
2.Now on the day that the tabernacle was erected the cloud covered the tabernacle, the tent of the testimony, and in the evening it was like the appearance of fire over the tabernacle, until morning. (Numbers 9:15)
3."For seven days no leaven shall be seen with you in all your territory, and none of the flesh which you sacrifice on the evening of the first day shall remain overnight until morning." (Deuteronomy 16:4)
4."And the vision of the evenings and mornings which has been told is true; but keep the vision secret, for it pertains to many days in the future." (Daniel 8:26)
The first three verses obviously refer to 24 hour days, since this is readily apparent from the context. The fourth one refers to many evenings and mornings, which "pertains to many days in the future." This verse actually refers to events that are yet to happen, which is 3000 years of days from when it was originally written. One could easily say that these mornings and evenings represent thousands of years.

However, none of these verses have the form which is seen in the Genesis account. Let's look at the form of these "evenings and mornings:"

•And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. (Genesis 1:5)
•And God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. (Genesis 1:8)
•And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. (Genesis 1:13)
•And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. (Genesis 1:19)
•And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. (Genesis 1:23)
•And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. (Genesis 1:31)
The actual number of words in Hebrew is much fewer than that of the English translations. The words "and there was" are not in the Hebrew, but added to make the English flow better. The actual translation is "evening and morning 'n' day." There is no way to discern from the context that the text is referring to 24 hour days.

How would God have changed the text if He intended it to indicate 24 hour days? If God were to have created in 24 hour days, I would have expected the Genesis text to have begun with a statement to the effect that "God did 'x' in the morning" and "God did 'y' in the evening," as opposed to the very unusual construction of telling all God did and then ending with both evening and morning side by side at the end of the "day." So, the order indicates the end (evening) of one day is followed by the dawning (morning) of the next day. In addition, one would expect that if God chose to create the world in a few days He would have indicated it was all created in a few days instead of one day (Genesis 2:4) (2). This verse indicates to me that the Genesis days are other than 12 or 24 hour periods of time.

Scripture Declares the Days to be Long Specific biblical examples of evidence for long creation days include:

1.The "Day of the Lord" refers to a seven year period of time.
2.Genesis 2:4 refers to all 6 days of creation as one day, "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven."
3.The seventh day of Genesis is not closed. In all other days, "there is the evening and the morning, the n day."
4.In the book of Hebrews, the author tells us to labor to enter into God's seventh day of rest. By any calculation, God's seventh day of rest has been at least 6,000 years long:
For He has thus said somewhere concerning the seventh day, "And God rested on the seventh day from all His works"... Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall through following the same example of disobedience. (Hebrews 4:4-11)
5.The psalmist (Moses, the author of Genesis) says "For a thousand years in Thy sight are like yesterday when it passes by, or as a watch in the night." (Psalm 90:4).
6.The apostle Peter tells us with God "A thousand years is as one day" (2 Peter 3:8).
7.The third day must have been longer than 24-hours, since the text indicates a process that would take a year or longer. On this day, God allowed the land to produce vegetation, tress and fruit. The text specifically states that the land produced trees that bore fruit with seed in it (3). Any horticulturist knows that fruit-bearing trees requires several years to grow to produce fruit. However, the text states that the land produced these trees (indicating a natural process) and that it all occurred on the third day. Obviously, such a "day" could not have been only 24 hours long.
8.The events of the sixth day of creation require time beyond 24 hours. On this day, God created the mammals and mankind. He also planted a garden, watered it, let it grow, and put man in it, with instruction on its care and maintenance. Then God brought all the animals to Adam to be named. This job, in itself would take many days or weeks. Next, God put Adam to sleep and created Eve. It is very unlikely all of this could take place in 24 hours, since much of it was dependent upon Adam, who did not have the abilities of God.
9.The Bible itself states that the covenant and laws of God have been proclaimed to a "thousand generations" (Deuteronomy 7:9, 1 Chronicles 16:15, Psalm 105:8). Even if a generation is considered to be 20 years, this adds up to at least 20,000 years. A biblical generation is often described as being 40 years, which would represent at least 40,000 years. However, since the first dozen or more generations were nearly 1,000 years, this would make humans nearly 50,000 years old, which agrees very well with dates from paleontology and molecular biology (see Descent of Mankind Theory: Disproved by Molecular Biology).

Early Church Fathers Believed the Creation Days were Long The belief that creation days are long periods of time is not just a recent interpretation of the scriptures, but was prevalent since the first century. Dr. Ross has published a book entitled Creation and Time, which documents in detail what first century Jewish scholars and the early Christian church fathers said regarding their interpretation of creation chronology (5). Jewish scholars include Philo and Josephus, while Christian fathers include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus (through writings of Ambrose), Clement, Origen, Lactantius, Victorinus, Methodius, Augustine, Eusebius, Basil, and Ambrose. Among this group, nearly all acknowledged the likelihood that the creation days were longer than 24 hours. The evidence presented in Creation and Time is both overwhelming and well documented (all references are given). You can read and/or download translations of the actual text of all of the early church fathers at Wheaton College's server. The collection consists of nearly forty files, averaging ~2 mb each. Alternatively, these writings can be obtained on CD from Logos Research.

All of this biblical and historical evidence has led us to conclude that the days of Genesis 1 are not literal 24 hour days, but long periods of time during which God chose to create different species of life.

Appearance of Age If God had created the universe in an instant, there would be no evidence from nature that He created it. The Bible states God has shown himself to all men through His creation so that men are without excuse in rejecting God (6). In addition, the universe declares God's glory, which is a sum of God's innate and unchangeable character (7). The Bible also states the universe declares God's righteousness (8). God's righteousness prevents Him from sinning. The scriptures say God cannot lie (9).

Therefore, from the Bible, we conclude that God does not lie or deceive, either from His word or from His record of nature. The heavens declare the universe to be at least 10 billion years old. In addition, we have the ability to see galaxies in the universe which are billions of light years away. If one claims the universe is 6,000 years old, he must state that God created the light from these distant galaxies in transit less than 6,000 light years from the earth. There are signs that the light has indeed been in transit for very long periods of time and was not somehow created in space relatively recently. Frequencies of known spectral lines show spreading or broadening which would occur after long travel times through space containing dust and debris. Since this light appears to be very old and to have originated from a point billions of light years away, if the universe is actually 6,000 years old, the heavens must be declaring a lie, an apparently old universe which is actually very young.

Let me give one example. For now let us assume the universe is 6 to 10 thousand years old and God created the light-beams already in place. Say we are watching a star in our telescope which is two million light years away, and we notice that it explodes (yes, supernova explosions have been observed). That means the light reaching us now is carrying the information recording this distant happening. Now trace this part of the light beam backwards in time along the path of the light beam. By the time you get back to the time of creation (6 to 10 thousand years ago) you have reached a point which is less than 1 percent of the distance to the star. This would mean that the "explosion" part of the light-beam began its journey from here - and not from the star! Thus, the information recording this explosion had to be "built-in" to the light beam, so what we see as having happened to that star may never have happened at all. The idea that observation of things further than around 10,000 light-years away is not necessarily linked to physical reality would be unsettling from both a scientific and theological viewpoint. I cannot accept a God who lies by creating deceptions.

Appearance of Age Rebuttals Many have asked the following question: Since God probably created Adam full grown and mature why couldn't God have done the same thing with the universe? First, note that God had a choice of creating Adam adult sized, or as a baby. Obviously if Adam was created as a baby, God would have to provide a means of nurturing him. This would require some special agency or being, or God could have made Adam a very special baby who did not require special care. Although God could have done any of these things, we believe God operates according to the principle of simplicity. Thus, He simply created the first man full-sized. However, Adam's body did not necessarily have signs of age. Size by itself is not an indication of age except perhaps to tell that the person is not a child. If a doctor examines an adult to determine age he might look at skin condition, liver spot progression, hair, teeth, cholesterol level, metabolism, scars, etc. I believe that Adam's body had none of these signs of age. God created Adam sinless, with no spiritual deterioration, and I believe He also created Adam with a perfect body, with no physical deterioration. Thus I do not believe Adam had an "apparent age."

Other arguments often used to support the appearance of age argument is the wine that Jesus made from water. It was the best wine, implying that it was aged. However, the wine may or may not have had the chemical components of aged wine.

Ultimately, the downfall of the appearance of age argument is that the Bible never supports this idea with regard to the creation. The Bible explains the miracles of God and tells us when things were made as if they were old (like the wine that Jesus made from water). In contrast, there is not one verse in the Bible that suggests that God made the Earth look older than it actually is.

http://www.godandscience.org/youngea...ogressive.html

John 9:4
I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

[ewoksrule]

# Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with a number 359 times, and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception?

# Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with the word “evening” or “morning” 23 times. “Evening” and “morning” appear in association, but without yom, 38 times. All 61 times the text refers to an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception?

# In Genesis 1:5, yom occurs in context with the word “night.” Outside of Genesis 1, “night” is used with yom 53 times, and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception? Even the usage of the word “light” with yom in this passage determines the meaning as ordinary day.

Here is a article on "What is wrong with progressive Creationism"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...ssive-creation

Another article on "What is progressive Creationism"
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c009.html

Progressive Creationism is an attempt by many evangelical Christians to harmonize the teachings of modern science with the Bible. However, rather than confirming the truths of the Bible, Progressive Creationism supports the foundational tenets of evolutionary science and causes greater anxiety among believers that indeed God's word cannot be rightly understood by the common, untrained layperson. After-all, the “proofs” for Progressive Creationism come mainly from the field of science, not from the simple teachings of the Bible. In this way, Progressive Creation erects a subtle barrier between the believer and the Bible, a wall is constructed between the believer and God Himself.-Mark Van Bebber

Martin Luther said:

I have often said that whoever would study Holy Scripture should be sure to see to it that he stays with the simple words as long as he can and by no means departs from them unless an article of faith compels him to understand them differently. For of this we must be certain: no clearer speech has been heard on Earth than what God has spoken.

[ewoksrule]

You mentioned that "Early Church Fathers Believed the Creation Days were Long" but actually many did not.

A straightforward view of Genesis was the view of Moses (Exodus 20:8–11), the Apostle Paul (Romans 5:12; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22,45; 1 Tim. 2:13–14) and the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:3–7), and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself (Matthew 19:3–6; Mark 10:6–9; Luke 17:26–27).

It was also the view of the vast majority of the Church Fathers, including the faithful defender of the Trinity, Basil the Great.

And the great leaders of the 16th Century Protestant Reformation, in returning to biblical authority, also accepted a straightforward view of Genesis. This includes the Father of the Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin