ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Planet Created In Six Days

What fraction of Christians believe that God created the world in six literal days and rested the seventh one, thereby establishing the 7-day week? Simple yes or no.

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 10/12/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



Leon:

Because many things the Bible says are literal, and many are metaphorical, and it is an error to mistake one for the other. Unfortuantely, there is much debate on which are literal and which are not. For example, Jesus is The Vine, but he was not made of wood, nor did he produce grapes.
---StrongAxe on 10/12/11


Okaaay! JESUS IS DIVINE!!! Is that literal enough StrongAxe?
---Leon on 10/14/11


Trav: Thanks (maybe!). Personally I use Gen 1, but I just mean that IF someone wants to take the order from Gen 2, or even tells me that since the two are different, he/she will have different ideas, I will just say that I don't agree.
---Jennifer on 10/14/11


God could've used the evolution process, in-whole or in-part, to create the Earth.
Rocky on 10/13/11
OR he could have just spoken it into existence instantaneously like he did everything else.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11
Everything else was instantaneously? Why did he take 6 days to create everything instead of doing it instantaneously? For that matter, why create the earth and have it go through a 4,000+ year process with billions of people going through a process of personal growth and evolution? Why not just create the end result in an instant? That argument is bogus.
---Rocky on 10/14/11


You certainly doubt the validity of what the bible says about the flood.

...its interesting to note that you just pick and choose which parts of the bible to believe.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11

Believe all scripture...with witnesses. Choose a place in scripture. Multiple scriptural witnesses can/will confirm.

Validity? Hebrew word Erets validates the SIZE of Flood.
You are validating taught, fairly recent doctrine of men Jason. Without considering/researching translation of....men.
Only point. I've done/doing research for myself.
Bout that water pressure, 5miles worth...what say ye?
2 Cor13:1
..... In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
---Trav on 10/14/11


---Warwick on 10/14/11
It says God created in 6 defined length, evening and morning 24hr days-confirmed by Exodus 20:8-11
It never says 24 hours in that cite. That is a lie. It never said nor implied "defined length" either.
When coupled with a number i.e. 1,2,3, or 1st,2nd,3rd it means 24hr days.
Where do you allege that is written?
Why would God use 'day' at all if He did not create in 6 days?
Perhaps because it was a simple way to explain something complicated so it could be understand by using terms the audience would be familiar with.
was He embarassed because it actually took longer?
What a stupid comment - it only embarrasses you.
---Rocky on 10/14/11




1) The current evolutionary theory does deny God because it says it all happened by naturalistic processes or did you forget that part?

Again narrow-minded thinking. God could've used the evolution process, in-whole or in-part, to create the Earth.
Rocky on 10/13/11

OR he could have just spoken it into existence instantaneously like he did everything else. Evolution is contrary to the bible in most respects, but we can leave that for another thread.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


---Jason1072 10/13/11
1) NOT true. Ever read childrens book on dinosaurs? Theyre told billions of years from the outset.
Your kidding right? You are saying that kids learn about evolution before the Genesis creation story. That is ridiculous. I know I heard about the creation story before I was 6 years old, but did not hear about evolution until I was in ninth grade biology class. Kids probably learn evolution a little earlier today but not as early as the creation story. I had toy dinosaurs to play with as a kid but never learned then about evolution. You are just being plain foolish. It's amazing you think you can get away with such trash.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/14/11


StrongAxe, we can test this 3 ways:

1) By Scripture.

It says God created in 6 defined length, evening and morning 24hr days-confirmed by Exodus 20:8-11
No other length for the days of creation is given in Scripture.

2) By grammar.

'Day' has three meanings. When coupled with a number i.e. 1,2,3, or 1st,2nd,3rd it means 24hr days. If you said you were going away for 6 days would I need to ask-how long are your days?

3) Logic.
Why would God use 'day' at all if He did not create in 6 days? Was He trying to confuse us, didn't know, was He embarassed because it actually took longer?
---Warwick on 10/14/11


---Jason1072 10/13/11 (part 2)
So preaching Gods word as its written is a bias, eh?
As I used the word, yes, it was bias. When comparing two sides, if only one side is taught that is bias, whether it is creationsim or evolution, or any other subject. You try to take words out of context and pick at them shame on you for distorting again.
2) WRONG again! They believe it because God said so, but also because thats where the evidence leads.
You are lying again. Faith leads to creationism, not evidence.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/14/11


Rocky in reality children are commonly taught evolutionary/long-ages principles in pre-school. For one example dinosaurs always come 'packaged' with millions of years!

The smaller percentage of children who go to church may be taught the creation story but often not well.

However the large majority are indoctrinated into evolution without ever hearing the Biblcal creation epic. For example when was the last time you saw a nature documentary on TV which gave glory to God as Creator? Never?
---Warwick on 10/14/11




David I repeat. If the lack of 'there was evening and there was morning-the seventh day' means the day never ended it also means, by the same reasoning, that it never began.

And there was evening refers to the beginning of the day, in middle eastern thinking. And there was morning refers to the end of darkness and the commencement of daylight

The commencement of the next evening makes one full day. If there is no-And there was evening-means the day never began.

Think it through.
---Warwick on 10/14/11


If Gen 2:15-25 is a methaphor, why not also Gen 1?

We can't have both
---Jennifer on 10/13/11

Your a thinker Jennifer... File study Berean style, Adam as a separate creation. Noah the recorded remant of forward.
Gen 5:1
This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him,
Deut 32:8
When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

Romans 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
---Trav on 10/14/11


1) Likewise the creation story. Little kids often learn the creation story at a tender age, long before they learn about evolution. If anything this explains a bias
2) It's simple. I already know. They think theyre required to believe it to protect their belief in God ---Rocky 10/13/11

1) NOT true. Ever read childrens book on dinosaurs? Theyre told billions of years from the outset. So preaching Gods word as its written is a bias, eh?
2) WRONG again! They believe it because God said so, but also because thats where the evidence leads, but lots of people including evolutionists prefer not to know the truth. I think youve just accepted evolution at face value without seriously questioning it and considering the alternative.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


1) When one has been indoctrinated with evolution for so long and its presented as the only viable theory, its pretty hard to believe anything else.
2) You should really spend more time finding out why young earth creationists believe what they believe
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11
1) Likewise the creation story. Little kids often learn the creation story at a tender age, long before they learn about evolution. If anything this explains a bias for creationism over evolution.
2) It's simple. I already know. They think they are required to believe it to protect their belief in God and to believe a literal Bible. No open-minded inquiry at all. It's learning to defend an objective, not a search for truth.
---Rocky on 10/13/11


---Jason1072 10/13/11
1) The current evolutionary theory does deny God because it says it all happened by naturalistic processes or did you forget that part?
Again narrow-minded thinking. God could've used the evolution process, in-whole or in-part, to create the Earth.
2)No lies or distortion here
Congratulations. Let's celebrate. A post with no major distortion.
3)youre the one that said you didn't believe in the literal creation story or the flood account
To be complete and not mislead, I also said I'm not positive they didn't occur, I just think they didn't. The way you state it may cause readers to think I categorically denied them, which I didn't. Be careful how you word things.
(Continued)
---Rocky on 10/13/11


Lee, I take it as a given that Jesus uniquely knows exactly when man was made.

Therefore, remembering He is the Creator, when He says man was made at the beginning of creation He knows the facts, and what He means. He does not lie, or make mistakes. By simple deduction He is therefore referring to the beginning of the creation, (as per Romans 8:22), not creation week.

A rough calculation places Jesus as living about 1.46 million days after the beginning. Therefore if He wishes to describe day 6 as being at the beginning of the 1.46 million days up to His time on earth, who are we to contradict Him?

It all depends upon whether your authority is Jesus or man! See Colossians 2:8
---Warwick on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


---Jason1072 10/13/11 (continued)
4) Btw, you seem to rely on Wiki a lot which isn't always a reliable source and it's secular. Perhaps you should check out some Christian sources like Discovery Institute, Institute of Creation Research, Answersingenesis and Creation Research (John Mackay).
I use Wikipedia a lot because it has a lot of information on secular and common religious subjects that can be easily found, by myself and readers, is reasonably objective, and its credibility known. Further, I use it a lot because I seem to be the one providing balance while others already quoted religious sources. However I believe on most subjects I quote the Bible more often than Wikipedia. Here I've provided the alternate viewpoint.
---Rocky on 10/13/11


2) You fear evolution because you think it denies God. It doesn't.
---Rocky on 10/12/11

The current evolutionary theory does deny God because it says it all happened by naturalistic processes or did you forget that part?

It would be nice if you made just one post on this thread without a single lie or distortion.
---Rocky on 10/13/11

No lies or distortion here, youre the one that said you didnt believe in the literal creation story or the flood account, not me. Btw, you seem to rely on Wiki a lot which isnt always a reliable source and its secular. Perhaps you should check out some Christian sources like Discovery Institute, Institute of Creation Research, Answersingenesis and Creation Research (John Mackay).
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

In Genesis we read that at the beginning of creation, God created light (period one), not male and female.

So it is really a matter of interpretation. Christ did not say anything about how long the creation periods were.

Assumptions again on your part and interpretation to fit your pre-conceived and unfounded ideologies. Not things noted of educated people!

You really need to stop trying to beat life into dead horses and move onto the meat of God's word.
---lee1538 on 10/13/11


Warwick:

Yes, God's Word (i.e. the things God ACTUALLY SAID) are true. Yes, the Genesis account is consistent with 6 24-hour days. But you have NOT proven that it is INCONSISTENT with longer days.

Also, I personally have not been claiming that the Genesis days are long days. Merely that the Bible nowhere says that they are 24 hour ones, so we can't know for sure which is which based on Bible texts alone.


Trav:

40000 year old wood weakens the 4-billon-year-old earth model and/or carbon dating, just as the discovery of a 99-foot-tall man would confirm, yet weaken, the hypothesis that all humans are less than 100 feet tall.
---StrongAxe on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


I already reported the statistics showing the number of scientists that dont believe evolution is very small. ---Rocky on 10/13/11

You did indeed, I just didnt see it. Im not refuting most scientists believe in evolution, but just because they do doesnt make evolution scientific. Just because the majority says it, doesnt mean its true. The majority thought the earth was flat. The majority thought heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects. When one has been indoctrinated with evolution for so long and its presented as the only viable theory, its pretty hard to believe anything else. You should really spend more time finding out why young earth creationists believe what they believe and then youll have a balanced viewpoint.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


I never said it was allegory. Ever. I stated flood happened. Just like (1500+ application)scriptures on "erets" said it happened. Salvation doesn't hinge on this issue...only truth or... ---Trav on 10/13/11

You certainly doubt the validity of what the bible says about the flood. I never said Salvation hinged on this issue, but its interesting to note that you just pick and choose which parts of the bible to believe.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


the speed of light is not a constant.
It has been assumed to be a constant for many years, until recently.
Evidence shows that light can bend and slow and may even speed up.
The view we see from Earth is only relative to our surroundings, even 26,000 miles away from our core.
Light changes speed.
I'm sure someone here could explain how we know there are sattelites (planets) orbitting other stars.
Planets which give no light of their own and are too small to detect reflection from their star.
---micha9344 on 10/13/11


Lee, in John 3:12 Jesus says we must trust what He says about earthly things.

Jesus was always very clear that God's word is true from the beginning.

Mark 10:6-8 He says the real events of Genesis are The foundation for Christian marriage. He also says man was made at the beginning of creation. This fits with 6-day creation, but directly contradicts long/ages evolutionary beliefs.

The NT is very clear the real, historical events of the early chapters of Genesis are the only foundation for the reason Jesus really came and really died upon the cross.

You call Genesis a folk tale but 2 Timothy 3:16 says "All Scripture is God-breathed...."

My 'fight' is against all BiblioSceptics such as you Lee.
---Warwick on 10/13/11


Send a Free Father's Day Ecard


Jennifer, Genesis 1 & 2 are not two conflicting versions of creation. In fact as recorded in Matthew 19: 4-6, and Mark 10:5-9 Jesus combines Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 to say man was made at the beginning of creation and that Adam and Eve became one flesh. No suggestion there that He the Creator thought they were two conflicting versions of creation.

Genesis Ch. 1 covers the creation of everything, chronologically.

Genesis Ch.2 is man-centered, recapping the creation of the man and woman, providing details not provided in Ch.1. It is not another creation account as it doesn't mention the creation of the earth, sun, moon, stars, seas, land, sky, sea creatures, creeping creatures etc.

I hope that helps.
---Warwick on 10/13/11


Warwick apparently is on a crusade to battle those whom he believes are evolutionists. If you believe exactly what the Genesis account states, then you will have problems with the like of him.

Most will agreee that the Genesis account is an account of creation that has been handed downward by oral tradition from one generation to the other. So it is not suprising that there are a few holes in the creation account.

And "W" wants to help his Adventists friends pitch adherence to the old Jewish sabbath.

And yes, maybe he is too old to change his tune as he has played the same old broken instrument for too many years.
---lee1538 on 10/13/11


I'll bring another difficulty with the 7 day idea, though it is only minor.

In Gen 1, we are told of the 7 days, and we are also told that animals were created BEFORE man.

In Gen 2:15-25, we are told that man was created BEFORE animals, then animals, then woman.

If we want to take Gen 1 as literally true, then Gen 2:15-25 must be just a metaphor.

If Gen 2:15-25 is a methaphor, why not also Gen 1?

We can't have both
---Jennifer on 10/13/11


Warwick:
You keep flogging this dead horse over and over again. Even though nobody has been able to provide any proof that they are different, you have not been able to provide any proofe that they are the same. You merely ASSUME they are same.
---StrongAxe on 10/12/11

What one will not address speaks loudly. Absent .....witness is a witness. He whines loudly and long for it when he thinks he's chasing someone.

"W", must defend what he has preached error or not 600 times. Won't address several Flood facts either, except with suppositions.
Would lose face if he had to start from scratch and relearn...or research. Called "work". He's never had too. $$$$. May be too old now. To go to the beach.
---Trav on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


3)As I asked you before, why are there many scientists who don't believe in evolution and many of those who believe in a young earth? Are they not scientific?
---Jason1072 on 10/12/11
3)AGAIN you distort! I already reported the statistics showing the number of scientists that dont believe evolution is very small. You presented nothing to refute it.
It would be nice if you made just one post on this thread without a single lie or distortion. I get tired of defending against all your lies. You never refute my proofs, you just throw out more lies and distortions. I came to this site looking for enlightenment, not to spend all my time defending myself from such obvious lies and distortions.
---Rocky on 10/13/11


Regarding the flood, 2 Peter 3:1-7 speaks of people like you and Trav, those that scoff and are willingly ignorant of the flood. Believe it to be allegory all you want, but you couldnt be more wrong.
---Jason1072 on 10/11/11

I never said it was allegory. Ever. I stated flood happened. Just like (1500+ application)scriptures on "erets" said it happened. I take nothing away. Or add nothing to. Like floating matts of debris with 50,000 insect, lizard,seed,tree,bird etc,etc. Dino eggs, no water pressure etc.
My Scripture aligns....peacefully for me.

There is a greater than 50% chance the verse you gave is yourself. I'll keep checking trav...you Jason. Salvation doesn't hinge on this issue...only truth or...
---Trav on 10/13/11


For example in Australia at the Crinum mine a ventilation shaft was cut. The core removed was bassalt said to be 30 million years old.
Carbon 14 was found and results placed the wood as being c40,000 years old.
That c14 was present is fact while the 30 million years is (proven incorrect) belief.
---Warwick on 10/12/11

40,000-33,000 year old proof instead of 30mil?
Amazing how science is good when it suits your doctrine and bad when it doesn't.

In this case you call bad good....and the good 40,000 still refutes your doctrines.
Elements composing the universe may be multi millions of years old.
The earth is made of the elements of the universe. Speed of light to reach us from planets is a Known.
---Trav on 10/13/11


Warwick- I agree with you when Paul wrote in Hebrews about 'entering God's rest'- this is spiritual rest. Paul went on to say- 'for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his.' (NIV)

Because God's 'rest' was still on going, Paul could say '...for anyone who enters God's rest.' To me this means God's day of rest was still running, otherwise how could people 'enter into it' or have a sharing with God in his rest day.

It is a spiritual resting I agree. Christians 'entering into God's rest', rest from their own work to focus on spiritual matters just as God rested from His creative activity. God resting doesn't mean He's doing nothing- 'My Father is always at his work to this very day'- Jo.5:17.
---David8318 on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


Does Warwick believe the AlmightyGod who is 'from eternity to eternity', who's never ceased working and who possesses 'great power and mighty strength' required a 24 hour break? (Is.40:26)

What does Warwick believe 'God's rest' means? Did God need to rest literally? Did God get puffed out of breath and needed to 'take five'?

It's clear from Paul in Hebrews 4 that God's 'rest' is not to get ones breath back. God's 'day of rest' I believe began at Genesis 2:2 and ends at Revelation chapter 22, at the end of Christ's 1000yr reign when God's mandate at Gen.1:28 is finally fulfilled. For then the 'Lord of the Sabbath'- JesusChrist- will have during God's 'sabbath resting' brought all creation back into perfect harmony with God.
---David8318 on 10/13/11


Warwick- you insist "and there was evening (the end of daylight) and there was morning (the end of darkness)...". Okay- but your opinion.

Could it be 'evening (the begining of darkness) and morning (the begining of daylight)? Evening time things are not so discernable. However, the morning brings a 'dawning' of matters- a realisation.

I believe 'evening and morning' are figurative statements given at the conclusion of each period when it 'dawned' on every intelligent creation the realisation of what God had brought to completion during that 'day'. Matters that may not have been so discernable at the begining of that period.

It's what was accomplished during each creative day that mattered, not how long it took.
---David8318 on 10/13/11


Ex. 12:2 This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you.

If Warwick really knew the Bible, he would realize that the calendar that the Jews used was a lunar calendar and according to the above verse started at the time of Moses. Thus with the start of the Jewish lunar calendar, the 7th day was established. However, there is no reason to believe that the 7th day of the Jewish week was also that 7th day God rested from Creation.

Furthermore a lunar month was 29 days so to conform to the seasons had to adjusted from time to time.
---lee1538 on 10/13/11


5) Again I never said the flood was untrue. But we do not need the flood to prove God has the ability to judge the world. Its unfortunate that you think so.
Please stop putting words in my mouth then attacking me for your words. It's amazing how many people on this site do just that, repeatedly.
---Rocky on 10/12/11

I personally dont need proof of the flood because I believe Gods word. But how do you think the rest of the world would react if scientists came out and said yes we believe there was a world-wide flood? Youd probably have less people doubting Gods word. Btw, Im not putting words in your mouth, youre doing a fine job saying it yourself.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


1) I never said the flood was allegory.
2) I never questioned "much of the historicity of the Bible".
---Rocky on 10/12/11

In the World Created in Six Days thread, you said "Still too many different species even to take all as juveniles, let alone have room for food...". So if you dont believe it to be a literal event then what do you believe it to be?? On 10/12/11 in this thread, you said regarding the six days of creation "I believe that it is allegory...". So whos distorting what?? The creation and the flood are two of the most profound events in the bible and you dont believe them to be literal. Personally, I choose to believe the bible until proven wrong. You seem to take the opposite approach.
---Jason1072 on 10/13/11


4) so why should people believe any of it.
5) The flood proves that God has the ability to judge this world
---Jason1072 10/12/11
4) Because it is true. I testify of it and challenging some Biblical passages does not weaken either. But more importantly the Spirit testifies of it.
5) Again I never said the flood was untrue. But we do not need the flood to prove God has the ability to judge the world. Its unfortunate that you think so.
Please stop putting words in my mouth then attacking me for your words. It's amazing how many people on this site do just that, repeatedly.
---Rocky on 10/12/11


StrongAxe, you are correct no one has been able to prove the 6 days of creation are of different length. However Exodus 20:8-11 plainly confirms they are all of the same length being the same as the days of the 7 day week. Unless this is so this commandment would have been meaningless. And as I have oft pointed out if the days are not ordinary 23hr days the Israelites could not have known when the Sabbath was, and would have been put to death for breaking this Commandment. Would God truly leave them, and us in such doubt.

The doubt is not in Scripture but in the minds of those who will not accept what Genesis 1 says only because it conflicts with their man-made philosophies.
---Warwick on 10/13/11


StrongAxe, maybe I have never answered your long day question as it is, I believe, irrelevant. No matter how we look at it, this was an extraordinary, unique day an exception to the rule. People considered it a unique day as they already knew what a normal day was.

It reminds me of 2 Peter 3:8 "...With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." Peter could only write this was as his readers already knew what a day and a thousand years were.

Some say this means that to God a day is a thousand years. It doesn't say that. It means God lives outside of time where a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day.
---Warwick on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Warwick proves true what I said regarding fundamentalists who are unable to distinguish between God and man. Possibly because it comes from their 'God-man' indoctrination.

Warwick is unable to see the fact that Gods ways are not mans ways- Isaiah 55:8. God's count of time is not the same as man, as per Moses- Ps.90:4.

Does Warwick's opinion stack up against scripture? Warwick believes the eternal God who is dynamic in energy needed 24hrs in order to 'rest'. God has been working and creating for eons prior to earth's creation and God needed a 24hr rest break!?

Warwick knows the 'rest' Christians enter is spiritual- but for God it's literal? (Heb.4:9,10) Fundamentalist trinitarians cannot distinguish between God and man.
---David8318 on 10/13/11


Asking for "a fraction" is not asking for "a yes or no". There are two acceptable definitions detailed in Genesis for "a day": one is a 24 hour period of time for man's measurement, and the other is one thousand years of time for God's measurement. And both of these measures the "1,000 to 1" ratio, where 1,000 years to man on earth is equal to 1 day to God in heaven, is clearly defined and referenced to Adam's death.
---Eloy on 10/13/11


Lee: ////What fraction of Christians believe that God created the world in six literal days

I would say about 98 percent of those who have IQs of greater than 75 and know how to think more than once a day. //

I just love it when you put your foot in your mouth!

"Only Sabbaterians believe in making holy the 7th day of the week"

Apparently, God is one of them as He is the ONLY one who can make a day holy, and He chose to make the Sabbath day holy. Sorry if that's inconvenient for you.
---jerry6593 on 10/13/11


Rhonda: "The earth already existed"

Not according to the Bible.

Exo 20:11 For IN SIX DAYS THE LORD MADE HEAVEN AND EARTH, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
---jerry6593 on 10/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


"The blog topic makes no sense. You can't ask a "what fraction" question with "yes" or "no"."

Sorry, the yes or no was not intended - it was a residual artifact.
---jerry6593 on 10/13/11


Warwick:

You keep flogging this dead horse over and over again. Even though nobody has been able to provide any proof that they are different, you have not been able to provide any proofe that they are the same. You merely ASSUME they are the same.

One person's opinion does not contradict what the Bible actually says, but rather what you ASSUME it says by reading between the lines.

I have given you one biblical example that specifically contradicts you (i.e. the day the sun stood still over Gibeon). That day was explicitly longer than our 24 hour day, but was still one day, because it was measured by day/night cycles, not 24 hours on a clock. Yet you hav never adequately explained this.
---StrongAxe on 10/12/11


1) It won't matter what I present to you, you simply won't believe it.
2) Evolutionists have an agenda and will take was ever action is necessary to protect their religion.
---Jason1072 on 10/12/11
1) I don't believe it because I have shown most of what you present to be very wrong or a distortion. I proved it in all 5 separate cases on you last post.
2) You are the one with the agenda, protecting your religion You fear evolution because you think it denies God. It doesn't. I don't fear because I don't know if evolution is true or not, or if some part is. I have no agenda but seeking truth, and I know God is true.
(Continued)
---Rocky on 10/12/11


Lee, in all the time we have debated this 'days' subject you have never been able to supply any evidence that-there was evening and there was morning-the first, , second, third,fourth, fifth, sixth day does not define ordinary, earth-rotation 24hr days, just as we know them today.

Conversely I have provided ample Biblical evidence to show that is exactly what God's word says throughout. However you believe your non evidence trumps the Biblical evidence!

Time has shown me it is pointless giving you Biblical references as you reject anything which contradicts your nonBiblical views.
---Warwick on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


Warwick:

Yes, I was also saying that we need to interpret which parts are literal and which parts are metaphorical and allegorical. That is not the problem.

The problem is that not evryone agrees on WHICH parts are literal, and which parts are allegorical. In some cases, it is quite plain, but in others, it is not. This is one reason we have so many different denominations today, because different groups believe the same scriptures, but they just believe they mean different things.
---StrongAxe on 10/12/11


Warwick //"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

The periods of creation were called 'days' and thus the Sabbath related to that seventh period when God finished His creation.

So sorry but you have yet to show anyone that all of those periods of creation had to be 24 hours in duration.

Your conclusions are all based on ASSUMPTIONS! designed to fit your pre-conceived theology.
---lee1538 on 10/12/11


David, does your personal view pass the Scriptural test?

The Lord commanded the Israelites work for 6 days and rest the 7th day.

Why?

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

This is not poetry, allegory or metaphor, but a sober command which came with the warning:

"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death" Exodus 31:15.

Therefore everything was created in the 6 day period, and the 7th was a day of the same length.
---Warwick on 10/12/11


David using your logic it would appear the 7th day never even began!

All creation days we described: "and there was evening (the end of daylight) and there was morning (the end of darkness)..." If the lack of 'evening and morning' means the 7th day did not end, then by the same logic it also meant it never began.

Hebrews 4 does not say the 7th day has continued until today, only that God's rest has continued. If on Monday I said I rested on Saturday and am still resting that does not mean Saturday still continues does it?

Also Hebrews 4:9-11 points out God's rest is only for those who are in God's kingdom. It is a spiritual rest. If the rest mentioned continues from creation then all people would be in this rest!
---Warwick on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


Rocky,

Lol, keep looking at Wiki for all your answers. Your indoctrination of evolution has blinded you. It won't matter what I present to you, you simply won't believe it. Evolutionists have an agenda and will take was ever action is necessary to protect their religion. As I asked you before, why are there many scientists who don't believe in evolution and many of those who believe in a young earth? Are they not scientific?
---Jason1072 on 10/12/11


Rocky, radiometric dating is based upon untestable assumptions, therefore cannot be described as scientific fact.The results are regularly shown to be wrong.

For example in Australia at the Crinum mine a ventilation shaft was cut. The core removed was bassalt said to be 30 million years old. Within this core was wood. Wood samples were sent to Geochron Laboratories, Cambridge, Boston (USA), and the Antares Mass Spectrometry laboratory at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), Lucas Heights near Sydney (Australia), for c14 testing. Carbon 14 was found and results placed the wood as being c40,000 years old.

That c14 was present is fact while the 30 million years is (proven incorrect) belief.
---Warwick on 10/12/11


Okay, to reply to the question: No, I don'l believe in a literal seven-day creation of the earth. This will be my last post here. God bless.
---God.is.everywhere on 10/12/11


StrongAxe, literature uses poetry, allegory, simile and so on. None the less we comprehend what the writer means when he says-my right-hand man, raining cats and dogs, had it up to here, doesn't have the brains of a flat-worm, not the sharpest pencil etc.

Likewise we understand in Scripture such devices are used but that does not mean it is not truth.

Jesus described Himself as the Good Shepherd however He wasn't literally a herder of sheep, but of humans. Isn't it clear what He means?

The more you read Scripture through and through the more you understand, as scripture interprets scripture.
---Warwick on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


Rocky "Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.....It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed" Luke 17: 26,27,30.

A straight-forward reading of this shows the writer considered the flood of Noah just as real as the coming of "the Son of Man."

Where is the allegory?
---Warwick on 10/12/11


1)On what basis do you believe the flood to be allegory?
2)Sounds like you question much of the historicity of the bible.
3)people like you cast doubt on much of Gods word,
---Jason1072 10/12/11
1) There you go distorting again. I never said the flood was allegory. Maybe it was, I dont know. It might have been the entire Earth, or a local flood, or just a story.
2) Another gross exaggeration and distortion. I never questioned "much of the historicity of the Bible".
3)More distortion in so many ways. I don't cast doubt on the God's words, just some possible incorrect printing. But certainly uphold all the important concepts and that most of the Bible is true.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/12/11


\\Genesis is a RENEWING of the earth. It took 6 days to renew the earth\\

I've heard that theory.

I don't believe it's correct, but I also don't think your eternal happiness depends on how you feel about this matter, either.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 10/12/11


I don't believe that it was literally six days. But God can do anything. Nothing is impossible with God. In the bible it says a thousand years is as one day with the Lord.Could have taken thousands of years to create the world. No one knows the correct answer to that question. We can only guess and speculate.
---Robyn on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


//Why is it you post the same question over and over and over and over?
---NurseRobert on 10/12/11
Probably because poor Jerry cannot find any definite answers to why he should observe the old covenant Jewish sabbath.

Maybe he is starting to question some of the unfounded and unscriptural viewpoints of his denomination.
---lee1538 on 10/12/11


Rhonda makes a valid point that during the 6 creative 'days' the earth is being 'renewed'. I prefer the word 'prepared'. The planet is being prepared by God through creative activity during the 6 creative periods for life.

There is strong evidence to believe the earth was created before the 6 creative 'days' began.

'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth'. This evidently occurred before the 6 creative days. The 'Heavens' spoken of in Gen.1:1 surely mean the Universe in general and the Milky Way Galaxy in which the earth is found. However, these 'heavens' in which the earth hangs are not included in the creative work discussed during the 6 'days'. The 'heavens' at verses 8 & 14 would refer to earth's atmosphere.
---David8318 on 10/12/11


To correspond with God's previous 6 creative days, the 7th day will finish with- 'and there came to be evening and morning... a 7th day.' As this injunction has not yet been said with regard to God's 7th day, it is reasonable to conclude God's 7th day has not yet finished (God's count of time is not comparable with the human count of time. Many fundamentalists believe it is and grossly confuse the issue).

When God's 7th day has finished, God's mandate at Gen.1:28 will be fulfilled.

Apostle Paul recognised the fact that God's 7th day was still ongoing in his day, some 4000yrs after it began- Hebrews 4:9,10. There is no scriptural injunction telling us the 7th day has ended.
---David8318 on 10/12/11


StrongAxe: Jerry wanted EACH OF US to answer a yes or no, so he could find what portion of US believe the 7 day creation

It is NOT a silly question, and it is perfectly OK
---Peter on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


No, you missed the entire point... Radiometric dates are used if they fall in line with the geologic time scale, the ages of which were arbitrarily set long before radiometric dating.
---Jason1072 10/12/11
No, the two are used together. From Wikipedia:
"Together with stratigraphic principles, radiometric dating methods are used in geochronology to establish the geological time scale."
Your original question was "So just how do we know those layers are millions of years old?" My response that "The stratification, folds, cracks, mountains, pressure ridges, erosion, fossil records, and other features show a long term process of formation and activity" hasn't been shown wrong by anything you've written.
---Rocky on 10/12/11


jerry6593:

The blog topic makes no sense. You can't ask a "what fraction" question with "yes" or "no". You might as well ask: How much change is in your pocket? Yes or no?


Leon:

Because many things the Bible says are literal, and many are metaphorical, and it is an error to mistake one for the other. Unfortuantely, there is much debate on which are literal and which are not. For example, Jesus is The Vine, but he was not made of wood, nor did he produce grapes.
---StrongAxe on 10/12/11


Rocky,

On what basis do you believe the flood to be an allegory? Sounds like you question much of the historicity of the bible. And yes it is important because people like you cast doubt on much of Gods word, so why should people believe any of it. The flood proves that God has the ability to judge this world and did in fact do as he said he would, you just CHOOSE not to believe it. What do you think he meant in 2 Peter 3:5-6?
---Jason1072 on 10/12/11


You miss the entire point. I talked about radiocarbon and radiometric data in addition to geological and other information. Sure they continue to refine the data, but the small changes in no way prove the basic theories are wrong ---Rocky on 10/12/11

No, you missed the entire point, read my post again. Radiometric dates are used if they fall in line with the geologic time scale, the ages of which were arbitrarily set long before radiometric dating was even invented. Also, did you actually read the assumptions built into radiometric dating or are you just going to keep the blinders on? The method used for dating the KBS Tuff was K-Ar, research it for yourself. FYI dates are routinely tossed if they dont fit the evolutionary theory.
---Jason1072 on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


The earth already existed so it is impossible to know how many "days" it took to create the earth, moon, sun, stars, galaxies etc

Genesis is a RENEWING of the earth. It took 6 days to renew the earth
---Rhonda on 10/12/11


This topic is getting really tedious. (Yawn)
---God.is.everywhere on 10/12/11


Since the Bible "literally" says that Jerry, why would Christians believe otherwise? (Ro. 10:17)
---Leon on 10/12/11


Why is it you post the same question over and over and over and over?
---NurseRobert on 10/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


You know, jerry, you asked this identical question a week ago, and you asked a similar question a week before that, and so on.

You keep on asking it.

I know how your mind works, and what you're leading up to.

Why are you so obsessed with and fixated on this issue?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 10/12/11


This is an open handed question. Meaning it does not matter how God created the earth. If the how was important then he would talk about the exploding stars which created the iron, gold, and other minerals into a fine dust. Then go into an explanation of gravity as the dust collected into larger chunks. Then how carbon atoms and others created amino acids and proteins etc until life was created. The point of the story is that God is powerful and controls all things. I would say no to 6 24 hour time periods.
---Scott1 on 10/12/11


//What fraction of Christians believe that God created the world in six literal days

I would say about 98 percent of those who have IQs of greater than 75 and know how to think more than once a day.

Only Sabbaterians believe in making holy the 7th day of the week, however, Christians that believe the Church is under the New Covenant and not the Old, believe we should worship every day and have communal worship on the Lord's Day = Sunday.
---lee1538 on 10/12/11


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.