Bare’shith ‘elohiym bara’ ‘et hasamayim wa‘et ha‘erets

Thanks for responding, Oh yes counting the "Begats", But even if one did this it would only serve to find the beginning of say Adam, but if you read the first few verses, Their is no time period between the beginning and the "First Day". Then if you really read carefully Adam was not created until sometime after the seventh day in Chapter two So millions of years could have elapsed between the creation of the earth and Adam.

Exactly.

Thank you Chiang_Mai_boy,

Yes I have seen so many different views on how they date the earth to 6000 years, But I can not figure out why they would want to do this and look so silly when they could just read it right and see that the earth is very old and man is but a new comer if you really want it could show the story of one particular man and his lineage.

Evolution I can agree with but there was or is nothing natural about the Universe forming, it was not natural, it was an abnomoly.

http://www.mylot.com/w/di... have my disagreements with theology, yet I have my disagreements with naturalism as well. Islander knows better, but continues to post atheistic one-liners in what seems to be a desperate attempt to resurrect a broken faith.

I am very spiritual. As i see it there is the choice of there being an ever existing cosmos (not universe), or an ever existing god. The former is much more natural to me. My belief is stone solid and i can always defend it.

The world just arose? People once thought that maggots once just arose out of rotting meat on their own but learned that it was due to flies laying eggs which hatched.

Yes I do understand that, I just can not understand why they ignore the obvious in the first sentences, "In the begging" has no set time in the past, and it is not even the first day literal or not. The period between the first day and in the beginning leaves the possibility of many many years and in fact there is millions of years and billions when looking at the creation of the universe. Even the word hayah that is translated as "was", as if it was created formless and void. The word obviously should be translated as "Became" or "come to pass", as in the proof of science that something happened to the earth and destroyed the planets life. Then we could understand that the "first day" was not a day of creation but a day starting to replenish the earth. But I do not believe it is a literal day ether.

I agree Adoniah.

a day to God is 1000 years. I haven't heard anybody declare that dinosaurs and man lived side by side at one time. Not something that was definite. Do I care either way? I'm just glad that they aren't here now. You think bird poop on your windshield is bad, how about pterodactyl poop? You come out side and are like "Oh*censored* what happened to my car!!!"

If religious texts were not taken literally because "it is gods word" and just being foolish, i think progress to real spiritual understanding would be made. No it is MANS word because a man has written every word, and over the centuries has translated, mistranslated and changed many words.

if you knew that the story little red riding hood was translated many times would you say that the story is no longer the same?

Translation doesn't change things. If I translate Thankyou to Spanish, it becomes Gracious. If I translate Gracious to Tagalog, it becomes salamat. It still means thank you. The meaning hasn't changed. So the idea that things have changed through translation are false.

redhotpogo You are very much correct, The passage of time between the creation (the begging) and the first day is not recorded, And the word used in the ORIGANALHebrew should actually be translated as becamevoid and with out form, meaning that something happened to the earth, and science I believe has it correct. A mass extension from a collision with an asteroid, that killed virtually everything on the planet, the earth did become lifeless and darkness by reason of the smoke, ash and thousands of metric tons of earth was thrown up into the atmosphere blocking out the sun and creating yet another ice age.

Hopefully I can shead some light here, The first doctrine you mentioned about "folding time"? Is a doctrine that for two thousand years before moses we were not under the law, then for two thousand years after moses ti Jesus we were under the law, Now for two thousand years after Jesus we are under grace.

The calculations for a 6000 year old earth is made by counting the "begots" in Geneses. placing Adam around 4000 BCE, But what they are not taking into account is that the bible actually says in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Between the "beginning" and the "first day" no time period is given and therefor it could have been millions or billions of years that had past. Plus the man the church calls Adam is not necessarily the "first" man, as he is mentioned in chapter two and after the day of rest some time. In chapter one we read man and woman were created on the sixth day together, but Adam was created after the seventh day and eve created after that.

So taking all that into consideration it does not actually disagree with Evolution.